On Wed, Nov 1, 2023 at 09:31:52PM +0100, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> On Wed, 2023-11-01 at 13:09 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 08:16:13AM +0100, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2021-02-17 at 15:08 -0500, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:
> > > > I just had a confusing moment try
On Thu, Nov 2, 2023 at 03:42:53PM +0100, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> On Thu, 2023-11-02 at 10:14 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Better, though "Is the range's upper bound unbounded?" makes me cringe.
> >
> > Oh, yeah, totally cringe, me too. :-)
> >
> > > It is not the bound that is bounded or not,
Hello!
I was looking into table access methods recently and found the
existing page a bit sparse. Here's a small patch adding a little more
example code to the table access methods page.
Let me know if there's anything I can do to fix my patch up!
Cheers,
Phil
v1-0001-Add-minimal-C-example-and
On Thu, 2023-11-02 at 10:14 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Better, though "Is the range's upper bound unbounded?" makes me cringe.
>
> Oh, yeah, totally cringe, me too. :-)
>
> > It is not the bound that is bounded or not, but the range.
> >
> > How about "Is the range unbounded at the upper end
On Thu, Nov 2, 2023 at 09:58:54AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > I found a cleaner improvement, attached.
>
> OK by me. Maybe that doesn't make the point strongly enough,
> but we can hope it's enough.
Agreed. I thought last night about the sentence and realized when we
sa
On Thu, Nov 2, 2023 at 08:56:13AM +0100, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> On Wed, 2023-11-01 at 18:03 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 1, 2023 at 09:40:43PM +0100, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> > > > Yes, I agree this documentation needs help.
> > > >
> > > > For upper/lower(), it is clear that the docu
Bruce Momjian writes:
> I found a cleaner improvement, attached.
OK by me. Maybe that doesn't make the point strongly enough,
but we can hope it's enough.
regards, tom lane
On Wed, Nov 1, 2023 at 07:34:59PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 1, 2023 at 07:12:48PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian writes:
> > > On Wed, Nov 1, 2023 at 06:32:37PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > >> But it *is* permissible, unless we add code to reject it during
> > >> SET as
On Wed, 2023-11-01 at 18:03 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 1, 2023 at 09:40:43PM +0100, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> > > Yes, I agree this documentation needs help.
> > >
> > > For upper/lower(), it is clear that the documentation is better saying
> > > "unspecified" rather than infinite. Th
