| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | lists(at)humanleg(dot)org(dot)uk, pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: SELECT ... FOR UPDATE OF clause documentation implies use of table_names rather than aliases |
| Date: | 2023-11-21 02:04:12 |
| Message-ID: | ZVwQHCA85qhKPUcG@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs |
On Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 03:44:04PM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
> I don't like this particular solution to the stated complaint. When a FROM
> entry has an alias it must be referenced via that alias anywhere it is
> referenced in the query - and indeed it is an error to not write the alias in
> your example. It is not an improvement to write [ table_name | alias ] in our
> syntax to try and demonstrate this requirement. If we do want to not say
> "table_name" I suggest we say instead "from_reference" and then just define
> what that means (i.e., an unaliased table name or an alias in the sibling FROM
> clause attached to this level of the query). I like this better anyway on the
> grounds that the thing being referenced can be a subquery or a view as well as
> a table.
Okay, how is the attached patch?
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
Only you can decide what is important to you.
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| alias.diff | text/x-diff | 1.6 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David G. Johnston | 2023-11-21 02:19:39 | Re: SELECT ... FOR UPDATE OF clause documentation implies use of table_names rather than aliases |
| Previous Message | Erik Wienhold | 2023-11-20 13:30:16 | Re: T is a mandatory date time separator in RFC3339 but documentation states differently |