Re: [DOCS] Two points about docs
On May 11, 2005, at 15:50, Vladimir Chukharev wrote: And I still think that an additional Appendix with a list of all functions and referencies to their descriptions would be very usefull. Can you comment on that? This has been brought up in the past. I don't think there's any reason there can't be one. Want to make a function appendix? :) Michael Glaesemann grzm myrealbox com ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [DOCS] Two points about docs
Vladimir Chukharev wrote: > On Tue, 10 May 2005 04:50:16 +0300, Bruce Momjian > wrote: > > > Vladimir Chukharev wrote: > >> About the link to the lo_* functions. I thought about adding > >> a sentence to Charpter 9 like 'And functions to manipulate large > >> objects are presented in Charpter 28.' right after the phrase > >> 'Users can also define their own functions and operators, as > >> described in Part V.' > >> > >> Do you think it's suitable? > > > > Not really. We don't mention pg_stat_activity functions either. I > > think people have to realize that some functions are covered in other > > sections of the manual. There is a clearly titled section for large > > objeccts. > > OK, what about writing down this idea? "Not all functions are listed > in this Chapter, some are in other sections of the manual." OK, done. -- Bruce Momjian| http://candle.pha.pa.us [email protected] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup.| Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 Index: doc/src/sgml/func.sgml === RCS file: /cvsroot/pgsql/doc/src/sgml/func.sgml,v retrieving revision 1.245 diff -c -c -r1.245 func.sgml *** doc/src/sgml/func.sgml 13 Apr 2005 00:20:10 - 1.245 --- doc/src/sgml/func.sgml 11 May 2005 13:32:41 - *** *** 32,38 SQL standard. Some of the extended functionality is present in other SQL database management systems, and in many cases this functionality is compatible and !consistent between the various implementations. --- 32,40 SQL standard. Some of the extended functionality is present in other SQL database management systems, and in many cases this functionality is compatible and !consistent between the various implementations. This chapter is also !not exhaustive; additional functions appear in relivant sections of !the manual. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Re: [DOCS] Two points about docs
Michael Glaesemann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On May 11, 2005, at 15:50, Vladimir Chukharev wrote: >> And I still think that an additional Appendix with a list of all >> functions and referencies to their descriptions would be very usefull. >> Can you comment on that? > This has been brought up in the past. I don't think there's any reason > there can't be one. Want to make a function appendix? :) I think this is more conventionally called an index ;-) regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Re: [DOCS] Two points about docs
Bruce Momjian writes: > !consistent between the various implementations. This chapter is also > !not exhaustive; additional functions appear in relivant sections of > !the manual. "relevant", please. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Re: [DOCS] Two points about docs
Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian writes: > > !consistent between the various implementations. This chapter is also > > !not exhaustive; additional functions appear in relivant sections of > > !the manual. > > "relevant", please. Yea, Neil got it. -- Bruce Momjian| http://candle.pha.pa.us [email protected] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup.| Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
Re: [DOCS] Two points about docs
On May 11, 2005, at 22:39, Tom Lane wrote: Michael Glaesemann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: This has been brought up in the past. I don't think there's any reason there can't be one. Want to make a function appendix? :) I think this is more conventionally called an index ;-) Hehe :) Thanks, Tom! I don't know how the "i" and "e" got swapped around, and that initial "app" is a complete mystery to me. Have to check my mail software, I think. ;) Michael Glaesemann grzm myrealbox com ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
[DOCS] create rule syntax
The manual shows slightly different variations for the create rule
syntax here and here:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.0/static/rules-update.html
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.0/static/sql-createrule.html
The attached patches makes the first look like the second. The key change
is that it shows how multiple actions are delimited:
(actions) vs. (command ; command ...)
Kris Jurka
Index: doc/src/sgml/rules.sgml
===
RCS file: /projects/cvsroot/pgsql/doc/src/sgml/rules.sgml,v
retrieving revision 1.41
diff -c -r1.41 rules.sgml
*** doc/src/sgml/rules.sgml 29 Jan 2005 23:45:36 - 1.41
--- doc/src/sgml/rules.sgml 11 May 2005 19:19:59 -
***
*** 902,910
Keep the syntax
! CREATE RULE rule_name AS ON event
! TO object [WHERE rule_qualification]
! DO [ALSO|INSTEAD] [action | (actions) |
NOTHING];
in mind.
--- 902,910
Keep the syntax
! CREATE [ OR REPLACE ] RULE name
AS ON event
! TO table [ WHERE
condition ]
! DO [ ALSO | INSTEAD ] { NOTHING | command | ( command ; command ... ) }
in mind.
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
