Hannu Krosing <ha...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > What I meant is that rather than leave it really undocumented, > document it as "system function for specific usage, has caveats > and may change in future versions. use at your own risk and > make sure you know what you are doing"
Well, that was my original assumption and intention; but when I went to look for where the operators for record *equals* were defined, I found that we had apparently chosen to leave them undocumented. Oddly, under a section titled "Row-wise Comparison" we only document the behavior of comparisons involving what the SQL spec calls <row value constructor>. I asked whether that was intentional, and heard only the chirping of crickets: http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/1378848776.70700.yahoomail...@web162902.mail.bf1.yahoo.com If we choose not to document the equals operator for records, it hardly makes sense to document the identical operator for records. > PostgreSQL has good enough introspection features that people > tend to find functions and operators using psql-s \d ... One would think so, yet I don't recall seeing anyone posting regarding the existing undocumented record comparison operators. Nor do I recall seeing anyone posting about the undocumented pattern comparison operators. -- Kevin Grittner EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
