Re: [PATCHES] [DOCS] Fix misleading references to columns in GRANT/REVOKE summaries
Tom Lane wrote: > True, there doesn't seem to be any point in providing a full syntax > summary rather than just saying "the SQL spec says you can grant > privileges on columns but we don't support that yet". I think it's pretty useful if people see a command of this form from some other implementation and don't know what it means. -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/ ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [PATCHES] [DOCS] Fix misleading references to columns in GRANT/REVOKE summaries
Bruce Momjian wrote: > > True, there doesn't seem to be any point in providing a full syntax > > summary rather than just saying "the SQL spec says you can grant > > privileges on columns but we don't support that yet". > > Agreed. Patch attached and applied. I don't see any other cases of > this in our documentation. That doesn't mean this one isn't useful. Please revert this. -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/ ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Re: [PATCHES] [DOCS] Fix misleading references to columns in GRANT/REVOKE summaries
Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > True, there doesn't seem to be any point in providing a full syntax > > > summary rather than just saying "the SQL spec says you can grant > > > privileges on columns but we don't support that yet". > > > > Agreed. Patch attached and applied. I don't see any other cases of > > this in our documentation. > > That doesn't mean this one isn't useful. Please revert this. Well, Tom and I thought it caused confusion, as did the person reporting the confusion. You saying to revert it isn't enough. -- Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Re: [PATCHES] [DOCS] Fix misleading references to columns in GRANT/REVOKE summaries
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> That doesn't mean this one isn't useful. Please revert this. > Well, Tom and I thought it caused confusion, as did the person reporting > the confusion. You saying to revert it isn't enough. A possible compromise is to describe or show the syntax in some informal form, so that it didn't look like one of the sections we use for supported syntax. I'm not sure what that would look like exactly, but I do see merit in both sides of this discussion... regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
Re: [PATCHES] [DOCS] Fix misleading references to columns in GRANT/REVOKE summaries
Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Peter Eisentraut wrote: > >> That doesn't mean this one isn't useful. Please revert this. > > > Well, Tom and I thought it caused confusion, as did the person reporting > > the confusion. You saying to revert it isn't enough. > > A possible compromise is to describe or show the syntax in some informal > form, so that it didn't look like one of the sections we use > for supported syntax. I'm not sure what that would look like exactly, > but I do see merit in both sides of this discussion... I am all for us describing how we don't match the SQL spec, but just showing the syntax doesn't seem to help people understand how we don't match the spec, does it? Are there more details to column-level GRANT except saying we don't support it? -- Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
