On 2021-Jun-22, David G. Johnston wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 2:28 PM Zach Aysan wrote:
> >> for example, col LIKE 'foo%' or col ~ '^foo', but not col LIKE '%bar',
> >> which would require a reversed index on the field. To use the reversed
> >> index, query with reverse(col) like
"David G. Johnston" writes:
> Do we have an existing convention in the syntax section to indicate
> defaults, either with emphasis, placement, or even an annotation like "*"?
No. The syntax diagrams verge on unreadability already, so I'm
unconvinced that trying to overload them with this issue
On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 8:29 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> Yeah. The way it's written fails to show, except via formatting,
> that IMMUTABLE/STABLE/VOLATILE are mutually exclusive;
>
It seems the STRICT -ness line needs brackets too then.
Also, back to volatility, volatile is the default option though
"David G. Johnston" writes:
> On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 6:31 AM PG Doc comments form
> wrote:
> Please separate the [ NOT ] LEAKPROOF from the OR list
> I would agree, and would add that I wonder whether the syntax for the three
> mutually exclusive options should be shown as such instead of
On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 6:31 AM PG Doc comments form
wrote:
> The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
>
> Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/13/sql-createfunction.html
> Description:
>
> | IMMUTABLE | STABLE | VOLATILE | [ NOT ] LEAKPROOF
>
> [ NOT ] LEAKPROOF is
The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/13/sql-createfunction.html
Description:
| IMMUTABLE | STABLE | VOLATILE | [ NOT ] LEAKPROOF
[ NOT ] LEAKPROOF is accepting separately ,
So why you written [ NOT ] LEAKPROOF with |
The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/13/multibyte.html
Description:
Here is a tiny modification at [1] (change CLIENT_ENCODING to lowercase):
-SET CLIENT_ENCODING TO 'value';
+SET client_encoding TO 'value';
Besides that,
