On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 8:27 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> Uh, is that actually a true statement? I thought the result *did* >>> include default values. That's more or less the point of returning them >>> all, after all. > >> Well, then I'm confused, because you and Dmitriy seem to be saying >> opposite things. > > [ after experimenting with the code ... ] Oh, I had been thinking that > PQconndefaults gives the same result as PQconninfoParse with an > empty-string argument, but that's not the case. Indeed, the former > fills in default values as current values, but the latter does not. > > The proposed wording change seems reasonable, except that "have a > corresponding value" seems a bit vague. Maybe better "have a non-null > val field".
I've committed something along these lines. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list (pgsql-docs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs
