On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 09:46:09PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 09:27:15PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> writes: > > > On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 08:59:35PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > >> 'Statement' might work. > > > > > OK, updated patch attached. Is "statement" too vague here? SQL > > > statement? query? > > > > "SQL statement" might be a good idea in the first sentence, but > > I don't think you need to repeat it in the second. > > > > What's bothering me about this wording is that you're talking about > > statements and then suddenly reference transactions (as being "those > > other things messing with your data"). This seems weirdly asymmetric, > > since after all you could equally well be the one messing with their > > data. > > Yes, that bugged me too, but then I realized that you only see the > changes from a transaction when it completes, not from each statement, > e.g. you can never see changes between statements of a multi-statement > transaction. > > I used "SQL statement" in the updated, attached patch.
Applied. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. + -- Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list (pgsql-docs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs
