Re: Documentation for SET var_name FROM CURRENT

From: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Documentation for SET var_name FROM CURRENT
Date: 2013-10-02 08:03:14
Message-ID: CAA4eK1L8BXcO31_VYZHePGcs=CMpZQFFAi5zcn=zx3OKVDG-zA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 9:01 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> Amit Kapila escribió:
>> While reading documentation for SET command, I observed that FROM
>> CURRENT syntax and its description is missing from SET command's
>> syntax page (http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/sql-set.html)
>>
>> Do you think that documentation should be updated for the same or is
>> there any reason why it is not documented?
>
> Did you look at the commit message that introduced it?

No, I just noticed while reading documentation that although syntax
SET var_name FROM CURRENT works, but the documentation didn't have it.
Commit meesage below explains why it is not there, but I think as
it works, it might be better to mention in some form (as described by
David in
previous mail or some other variant).

> commit e7889b83b7059e776f0a3d76bbbdd98687f4592c
> Author: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
> Date: Mon Sep 3 18:46:30 2007 +0000
>
> Support SET FROM CURRENT in CREATE/ALTER FUNCTION, ALTER DATABASE, ALTER ROLE.
> (Actually, it works as a plain statement too, but I didn't document that
> because it seems a bit useless.) Unify VariableResetStmt with
> VariableSetStmt, and clean up some ancient cruft in the representation of
> same.

Thanks for pointing at right location.

With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message KONDO Mitsumasa 2013-10-02 08:37:03 Who is pgFoundery administrator?
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2013-10-02 04:16:06 Re: Support for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY