| From: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Gilman <davidgilman1(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Note new NULLS NOT DISTINCT on unique index tutorial page |
| Date: | 2023-04-18 03:15:19 |
| Message-ID: | CAApHDvpqo980kCY_x=NvCtGk5wCf3pjCRXeBWKSnUHf1M=Yt-g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 at 02:40, David Gilman <davidgilman1(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> The SQL Language part of the docs has a brief page on unique indexes.
> It doesn't mention the new NULLS NOT DISTINCT functionality on unique
> indexes and this is a good place to mention it, as it already warns
> the user about the old/default behavior.
I think we should do this and apply it to v15 too.
It seems like a good idea to include the [NULLS [NOT] DISTINCT] in the
syntax synopsis too. Otherwise, the reader of that page is just left
guessing where they'll put NULLS NOT DISTINCT to get the behaviour
you've added the text for.
I've attached an updated patch with that plus 2 very small wording
tweaks to your proposed text.
David
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| doc_nulls_not_distinct_v2.patch | application/octet-stream | 1.5 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2023-04-18 03:19:30 | Do we really need two xl_heap_lock records? |
| Previous Message | sirisha chamarthi | 2023-04-18 02:57:58 | Re: Fix documentation for max_wal_size and min_wal_size |