Re: nchar is undocumented

From: David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Erik Wienhold <ewie(at)ewie(dot)name>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: nchar is undocumented
Date: 2024-05-05 01:04:11
Message-ID: CAApHDvqwt_dz2KWtY233nMnFo3mFfeFyzMKi3nB8B+yZASybKQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs

On Sun, 5 May 2024 at 12:41, Erik Wienhold <ewie(at)ewie(dot)name> wrote:
> So, I think we should either remove that one nchar instance (because it
> doesn't add any real value) or document it properly. The attached patch
> does the latter.

It seems easier to do the former, that way we don't need to reconsider
Peter's concerns about not having enough confidence that it matches
the standard.

I've included Alvaro and Peter to see what they think.

David

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-docs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Rowley 2024-05-05 07:27:18 Re: Missing examples for hash partitioning
Previous Message Erik Wienhold 2024-05-05 00:41:28 nchar is undocumented