| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | 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 03:16:04 |
| Message-ID: | ZVwg9AP4Zvj3RR1J@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs |
On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 07:19:39PM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
> The placement in the numbered listing section feels wrong, I am OK with
> the wording. It should be down in the clause details.
>
> FOR lock_strength [ OF from_reference [, ...] ] [ NOWAIT | SKIP LOCKED ] --
> need to change this spot to match
>
> where lock_strength can be one of
>
> [...]
>
> + and from_reference must be a table alias or non-hidden table_name referenced
> in the FROM clause.
>
> For more information on each [...]
Ah, good point. I was searching for "FOR UPDATE" so I missed that
section; updated patch attached.
--
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 | 2.0 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David G. Johnston | 2023-11-21 03:20:57 | Re: SELECT ... FOR UPDATE OF clause documentation implies use of table_names rather than aliases |
| Previous 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 |