enough by looking at array_send and array_recv:
https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=blob_plain;f=src/backend/utils/adt/arrayfuncs.c;hb=HEAD
regards, tom lane
m pretty sure the docs are correct. You should provide the exact
> commands you think should work and the error message you receive when you
> execute said commands.
I think probably the OP is confusing the current COPY syntax with the
obsolete form documented at the bottom of the COPY page.
regards, tom lane
e you're trying to use <-> with a pre-9.6
server. Since that feature was added in 9.6, it won't work.
We generally don't recommend reading documentation versions that don't
match your server.
regards, tom lane
ached patch.
Pushed, thanks!
regards, tom lane
as to be asked is what we think the use-case for this
table is at all. Different use-cases result in different ideas about the
best ordering.
regards, tom lane
oth is that the
* FOR UPDATE code is able to identify a target table in many cases where
* the other code can't, while the non-FOR-UPDATE case allows use of WHERE
* CURRENT OF with an insensitive cursor.
regards, tom lane
an error" would read better IMO. Or you could just stop with
"guaranteed to be updatable"; I don't think the rest adds much.
regards, tom lane
ensible.
I don't want to sound like I think what we've got now is the peak of
perfection, because it isn't. But we have to strike a balance between
formal correctness and readability for users who aren't familiar with
formal syntax notations. It's a difficult problem.
regards, tom lane
uld cause the cursor declaration to fail, too.
regards, tom lane
ld toolchain, but I think mostly the same
tags were complained of. Don't know the cause.
regards, tom lane
ermanent URLs.
> Maybe we should be
> looking for some more stable source of similar information?
Exactly.
regards, tom lane
int);
CREATE TABLE
regression=# create table bar as select 1 as x;
SELECT 1
regards, tom lane
like
In contrast, row-level triggers are fired for individual row change
events, and the triggers that are fired for an event are those
attached to the specific table containing the changed row, even if
it is a partition or child table not directly named in the query.
regards, tom lane
ow about something like
In contrast, row-level triggers are fired for each actual row change,
including changes in partitions or child tables that are not directly
named in the query.
Possibly "row operation" would be better than "row change".
regards, tom lane
Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> writes:
> Oh, I am sorry. I was focused on the first part of the sentence and
> didn't notice your change to the second part. How is this attachment?
Seems same as your previous version?
regards, tom lane
Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> writes:
> OK, updated patch with both fixes.
AFAICS that's the same patch you posted before.
regards, tom lane
Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> writes:
> How is the attached patch?
Maybe also make that text into a hyperlink to the SPI manual chapter?
regards, tom lane
Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 2/5/18 18:51, Tom Lane wrote:
>> So I can see two ways to approach this: add two new subsections at the end
>> of xindex.sgml, or create a new chapter about b-trees in Part VII
>> ("Internals")
list
What do you find unclear about this error message?
The reason seems clear enough to me: if the ordering expression isn't one
of the values that are being de-duplicated on, then there isn't a unique
value to associate with each surviving row for sorting purposes.
regards, tom lane
he
> behavior is defined.
In SQL:2011, it's 7.13 general rule 3) b) iii) 3) B),
on page 420 in the draft version I have.
regards, tom lane
be
merit in mentioning them in passing in the LIKE docs. But we should not
put them in a table with the LIKE ops themselves, IMO. That would just
invite confusion about what they do and whether you're supposed to use
them directly.
regards, tom lane
k where the last discussion left this was that we'd be
willing to accept SVG-format figures, but we were having a hard time
figuring out what tools to recommend for editing them, because available
editors have no respect for readability or preserving small deltas when
rewriting SVG files.
CONSTRAINT con1 CHECK (did > 100 AND name <> '')
> );
Hmm ... that example is legal syntax as-is, but considering that the
explanation for it says specifically that it's table-constraint syntax
not column-constraint syntax, I think you're right.
regards, tom lane
IF or two; but we abandoned that on the
grounds that it was unmaintainable and also incompatible with some
documentation output formats. I'm not too sure what the state of
play is on the latter point, now that we've switched to XML.
regards, tom lane
stgres data
file changes :-() but that doesn't mean it isn't a problem for us.
How can we resolve these issues?
regards, tom lane
get much nerdier than a bison grammar.)
regards, tom lane
in some very old branches like 9.2, but not OK in any
of 9.3 through 10. So I'm thinking that somebody broke some
version-specific website markup. No idea how to investigate further,
but I'm cc'ing the www list for comment.
regards, tom lane
uot;help" for help.
I can replicate your symptoms if there's not actually a matching
entry in the .pgpass file ...
regards, tom lane
nciple of archiving. Taking old notes files
out of the tree once we've stopped updating them would at least put
a limit on how long they're exposed to historical revisionism.
regards, tom lane
"Jonathan S. Katz" writes:
>> On Aug 6, 2018, at 3:27 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Actually, a concrete reason why that might not be good is that it results
>> in having a single point of failure: once we remove branch N's relnotes
>> from the active branches, the
wrong table entries,
can we recover?
This doesn't seem insoluble, but it might mean a bit more work to do
to ensure we can revert back to an earlier version of that table.
regards, tom lane
generated from the XML in some other stuff, but I don't know any
details. If nobody pops up here and answers your question in a reasonable
amount of time, try over at pgsql-www.
regards, tom lane
, I think, but that seems like a
completely wrong/misleading statement of the issue. Joe, can you think of
better phraseology?
regards, tom lane
l.org/docs/*/static/release-*.html
doesn't exist, then redirect to
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/old-release-notes/static/release-*.html;
it might be worth doing.
regards, tom lane
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> On 06/08/2018 00:57, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Anyway, I'd like to propose a compromise position that I don't think
>> has been discussed before: let's drop release notes for branches
>> that were already EOL when a given branch was released.
> Why
's certainly attractive that this doesn't seem like it'd entail
any manual effort once it's set up initially.
regards, tom lane
ibes creating
any sort of object ought to repeat this information. I doubt that people
would find that to be an improvement.
regards, tom lane
on when
it's displayed).
The existing text is indeed a bit deficient, because it fails to
draw a clear boundary between what the AT TIME ZONE operator is
doing and what is being done by the timestamp(tz) I/O functions.
But you're not making it better.
regards, tom lane
ith the pow() case, this'd
basically be enlarging our exposed surface of frozen API, and I don't
think that's desirable.
regards, tom lane
e it's
not the documented process.
regards, tom lane
om!).
Missed that --- will fix, thanks for noticing!
regards, tom lane
y the precision and scale explicitly.)
regards, tom lane
t; a name like “dumpfile” would be more clear?
+1 ... I thought the same. Will go fix it.
regards, tom lane
so it's hardly
unlikely that the input is different.
regards, tom lane
tty horrible
for psql's help.
regards, tom lane
it surprised
if it broke then.
regards, tom lane
"Jonathan S. Katz" <jk...@postgresql.org> writes:
> I would say that’s the exact reason why it should be documented,
> so it’s clear that it was by design.
Seems reasonable. Maybe something in 8.7.4 enum implementation details?
regards, tom lane
local variables
> TG_something' as it is for trigger local variables.
Ugh, yeah, that's a thinko isn't it. Will fix, thanks for noticing!
regards, tom lane
d up
doing that, but perhaps it's confused about vpath vs regular build.
Another theory is that configure went wrong somehow and inserted
bogus values into Makefile.global; was there any sign of distress
while running configure?
regards, tom lane
as been explicitly set will have an entry here".
regards, tom lane
Is your complaint just that this is inadequately documented?
I see that it's not spelled out in so many words on that page.
regards, tom lane
Flavio Henrique Araque Gurgel writes:
> Em ter, 28 de ago de 2018 às 18:21, Tom Lane escreveu:
>> You could as well argue that every single page that describes creating
>> any sort of object ought to repeat this information. I doubt that people
>> would find that to be an
ust be a complete sentence that stands on
> its own.
I am unfamiliar with this grammar "rule", and vigorously dispute that
anyone follows it in the real world.
regards, tom lane
?
> Probably DOC should explicitly say that if LATERAL function return empty set
> then current row is excluded from result set
That would be wrong for "LEFT JOIN LATERAL ...", so it does not seem
like an improvement.
regards, tom lane
create your own modified configuration if you
don't like what the standard one does. The stopword list, in particular,
is quite trivial to modify.
regards, tom lane
to document that? It's not the standard-approved
way of making a transaction read-only.
regards, tom lane
838fe25a9 of 2002-04-01) but it was changed later
that month (ccfaf9067 of 2002-04-29) when we added schema permissions
checks. Evidently I forgot to update the docs to match :-(
Will fix, thanks for noticing!
regards, tom lane
ease-11.html#RELEASE-11-ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Seems reasonable, but note the lag time --- unless somebody does
something out of the ordinary, those pages won't actually have
such tags till after the February minor releases.
regards, tom lane
ite the contrary. And, btw,
> client_min_messages accept both value.
I don't see anything particularly wrong here. The reason INFO is not
listed for client_min_messages is that it's not a useful setting:
INFO messages will be transmitted to the client regardless of what
client_min_messages is set to.
regards, tom lane
Jeff Janes writes:
> I don't know what to do about the visual misleadingness of single-entry
> TOCs in general, but at least we can make this specific cross reference
> more specific.
Agreed, done.
regards, tom lane
"Jonathan S. Katz" writes:
> On 11/20/18 9:59 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Yes. That was a dumb idea; the correct fix is to take that out, because
>> it's not appropriate here. There might be room for an additional section
>> later in the chapter that disc
that out, because
it's not appropriate here. There might be room for an additional section
later in the chapter that discusses INCLUDE, but we shouldn't be
cluttering the discussion of fundamental concepts like unique indexes
with that.
regards, tom lane
ght now it's near the end because it's mostly
info about an implementation detail; but it wouldn't be hard to
make the argument that covering indexes are more important than,
say, indexes with custom collations. Should we move it, and if
so to where?
regards, tom lane
y of them (though maybe not every one, not sure).
regards, tom lane
Michael Paquier writes:
> On Wed, Jan 02, 2019 at 06:11:55PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> In PG v10 and up this link goes to https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7159.
>> Evidently whoever updated it didn't bother to back-patch into old
>> branches.
> I don't think that really
text_to_cstring (PG_GETARG_TEXT_PP (1));
> cnt = PG_GETARG_INT32 (2);
You're right. Will fix, thanks for the report!
regards, tom lane
I haven't heard objections, I'll see about making this happen
during the first week of Feb (after the CF closes, but before
it's time to do the February releases' notes).
regards, tom lane
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> This has been committed. The SVG images are committed as well, so no
> new tools are required.
Buildfarm member alabio seems less than pleased.
regards, tom lane
variable than for others?
regards, tom lane
SIGN OWNED page for this behavior?
The REASSIGN OWNED page does mention that it doesn't touch privileges
on non-owned objects, but I agree that it'd be better to be explicit
that that applies to default privileges. Will fix, thanks for reporting!
regards, tom lane
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> On 2019-03-11 15:50, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Ideally, we'd treat them much as we do for bison output files:
>> we'll supply them in tarballs but you'd better have the relevant
>> tools if you want to build docs from a git pull. However, that
>&g
massive, unreadable,
and mostly content-free diffs in every patch.
regards, tom lane
ch as we do for bison output files:
we'll supply them in tarballs but you'd better have the relevant
tools if you want to build docs from a git pull. However, that
may be assuming too much about the portability of the tools ...
regards, tom lane
ation are you looking at?
PG hasn't supported server-side autocommit since 7.3.x. There is
an autocommit variable in psql, but we concluded the server-side
feature broke far more client code than it helped.
regards, tom lane
t unfortunate that ecpg's command looks exactly like
a server command, but there you have it.)
regards, tom lane
t this point that that feature isn't ever
coming back, so I'd be good with ripping out the whole para.
regards, tom lane
applies to several release branches; and when that happens
we almost always use identical release-note entries for all the
branches.
Another possible source of confusion is the version number format
change. 10.4 is a minor release in the v10 branch, not a major
release such as 9.6 was.
| func
pg_catalog | round | numeric | numeric, integer| func
(3 rows)
The description in the docs matches reality AFAICS.
regards, tom lane
"Jonathan S. Katz" writes:
> On 2/4/19 11:12 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Just for the record, this change causes the time to build HEAD's
>> HTML documentation to drop from ~120 sec to ~95 sec for me; the
>> size of the resulting html/ directory drops from 21MB to 15M
"Jonathan S. Katz" writes:
> On 2/4/19 4:25 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> After a bit more thought, I'm inclined to propose that the policy be
>> that we *don't* update the surviving back branches for branch retirement.
> ...so I guess in turn, we would not update back br
"Jonathan S. Katz" writes:
> On 1/26/19 10:06 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> If I haven't heard objections, I'll see about making this happen
>> during the first week of Feb (after the CF closes, but before
>> it's time to do the February releases' notes).
> Thank
"Jonathan S. Katz" writes:
> On 2/4/19 11:12 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> It's not quite clear to me what the policy would be for removing
>> back-branch links from this list when old versions drop out of support.
>> Should we go back and remove them in surviving back b
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2019-02-05 12:10:57 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> For something like release-9-6-10.html, there's no value in having it
>> appear in three or four different places. You can't even argue that
>> the later branches might be more up-to-date: that text is
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2019-02-05 12:24:00 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Huh? The release note contents are identical cross-branch.
>> I know, because I'm generally the one making them.
> The point is that links in release-$version.html in /current/ or in a
> magical
were to handle the website plumbing.
regards, tom lane
"Jonathan S. Katz" writes:
> On 2/5/19 11:37 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> After further thought about that, I'm liking the idea that was
>> discussed upthread of setting up a separate git repo for the
>> aggregate release notes.
> The contrary point I will make is ha
urrently points at
http://www.joeconway.com/plr.html
which does look a bit outdated ...
regards, tom lane
d.)
This distinction is widely ignored in casual speech or writing, but
it's still recognized in formal writing. I think our manual is
formal enough that we should try to get it right.
regards, tom lane
from obscure ones. I don't have any concrete
proposal to make right now, but I am hoping to kick off a
discussion about what such an organization would look like.
regards, tom lane
touched
by users of SPI.)
Not wedded to that, but it would reduce the risks of future mistakes
of this same sort.
regards, tom lane
N I get
Gather (cost=1000.00..11675.10 rows=1 width=8) (actual time=1.215..45.218 rows
=100 loops=1)
which without ANALYZE would just be
Gather (cost=1000.00..11675.10 rows=1 width=8)
The rows=1 estimate is equally wrong either way, but you don't get to
see the correct value without ANALYZE.
regards, tom lane
owing up
on your terminal. That could be a bug, but I'm not familiar enough
with the Cygwin environment to diagnose it.
> Any suggestions on what to do would be appreciated.
You'd probably be better off asking for help about this on the -novice
or -bugs lists than -docs.
regards, tom lane
Bruce Momjian writes:
> Where do we document the pg_config SQL function?
We don't, because it's just the infrastructure under the pg_config view.
regards, tom lane
Bruce Momjian writes:
> On Sat, May 11, 2019 at 05:45:01PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> On Sat, May 11, 2019 at 05:27:23PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> We don't, because it's just the infrastructure under the pg_config view.
> Uh, I listed it under "Funct
change it now.
There's probably some merit in having the documentation avoid the
use of "infinity" when it really means "unbounded", but I'm not
sure we can avoid it altogether without being obscure.
regards, tom lane
t doesn't mention COALESCE explicitly, though ... and I imagine
digging in the code for coerce_to_common_type callers might find
some other cases that aren't listed there.
regards, tom lane
valid" once all the pieces are attached.
However, I cannot find any coherent documentation explaining how
to do this (or why you'd want to). Am I just looking in the wrong
places?
regards, tom lane
hat.
BTW, is there anything equivalent for unique/pkey constraints?
I tried "add constraint unique ... not valid" and just got a
raspberry.
regards, tom lane
ly simple way to make it shorter is to say "00:00", leaving
out the seconds.
regards, tom lane
g as you're subscribed
to at least one PG list you can post to any of them.
regards, tom lane
1 - 100 of 594 matches
Mail list logo
