On 8 March 2011 02:54, Tom Lane wrote:
> Thom Brown writes:
>> On 7 March 2011 23:30, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Maybe we could say "the name or OID of a table", or some such phrase,
>>> so as to subtly avoid the expectation that what is being referred to
>>> is the datatype named "name"?
>
>> Yes, tha
Thom Brown writes:
> On 7 March 2011 23:30, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Maybe we could say "the name or OID of a table", or some such phrase,
>> so as to subtly avoid the expectation that what is being referred to
>> is the datatype named "name"?
> Yes, that would remove the ambiguity. :)
That wording t
Thom Brown writes:
> On 7 March 2011 22:39, Robert Haas wrote:
>> That's not really a typo so much as a think-o, I think. Maybe a
>> little more text would help clarify: A column-specific trigger (one
>> defined using the UPDATE OF
>> column_name syntax) will fire
>> when...
>>
>> It should rea
On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 02:31:18PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 2:07 PM, David Fetter wrote:
> > Re: docs, I'd actually like to see that list gone, as the separation
> > of docs from code is one that's actively unhelpful. We don't have a
> > separate "docs" team, and we righ
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 2:07 PM, David Fetter wrote:
> Re: docs, I'd actually like to see that list gone, as the separation
> of docs from code is one that's actively unhelpful. We don't have a
> separate "docs" team, and we rightly put the responsibility of
> documenting changes on the person or
On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 01:01:05PM -0600, Ross J. Reedstrom wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 03:45:17PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of lun mar 07 15:16:31 -0300
> > 2011:
> >
> > > If we do that then it becomes worth wondering what the -docs
> > > list is for
On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 03:45:17PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of lun mar 07 15:16:31 -0300 2011:
>
> > If we do that then it becomes worth wondering what the -docs list is for
> > at all. Maybe we *should* get rid of it; I dunno. I see your point
> > about ho
Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of lun mar 07 15:16:31 -0300 2011:
> If we do that then it becomes worth wondering what the -docs list is for
> at all. Maybe we *should* get rid of it; I dunno. I see your point
> about how the factual issues involved in a docs change ought to be
> vetted on -ha
On 7 March 2011 23:43, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Thom Brown wrote:
>> On 7 March 2011 22:39, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 7:05 AM, Thom Brown wrote:
This was spotted by someone who sent in a doc comment, although didn't
go with their sugges
Thom Brown writes:
> On 7 March 2011 23:21, David Fetter wrote:
>> As I'm putting together the patches section for the PostgreSQL Weekly
>> News, it helps me *enormously* to have only one list I need to check,
>> so at least for me, it's an enormous help to have all patches at least
>> CC'd, or b
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Thom Brown wrote:
> On 7 March 2011 22:39, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 7:05 AM, Thom Brown wrote:
>>> This was spotted by someone who sent in a doc comment, although didn't
>>> go with their suggestion. Patch attached.
>>
>> That's not really a
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 1:04 PM, Thom Brown wrote:
> On 7 March 2011 23:21, David Fetter wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 10:53:17PM +0530, Thom Brown wrote:
>>> On 7 March 2011 22:31, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> > On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 6:16 AM, Thom Brown wrote:
>>> >> On 7 March 2011 15:27, Thom
On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 11:34:48PM +0530, Thom Brown wrote:
> On 7 March 2011 23:21, David Fetter wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 10:53:17PM +0530, Thom Brown wrote:
> >> On 7 March 2011 22:31, Robert Haas wrote:
> >> > On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 6:16 AM, Thom Brown wrote:
> >> >> On 7 March 2011
On 7 March 2011 23:30, Tom Lane wrote:
> Thom Brown writes:
>> On 7 March 2011 20:49, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> The reason those are phrased as "OID or name" is that what they take is
>>> regclass, which means that things like pg_total_relation_size('table_name')
>>> do in fact work. I think the prop
On 7 March 2011 23:21, David Fetter wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 10:53:17PM +0530, Thom Brown wrote:
>> On 7 March 2011 22:31, Robert Haas wrote:
>> > On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 6:16 AM, Thom Brown wrote:
>> >> On 7 March 2011 15:27, Thom Brown wrote:
>> >>> I've attached a small patch with a b
Thom Brown writes:
> On 7 March 2011 20:49, Tom Lane wrote:
>> The reason those are phrased as "OID or name" is that what they take is
>> regclass, which means that things like pg_total_relation_size('table_name')
>> do in fact work. I think the proposed wording would leave people with
>> the id
On 7 March 2011 22:39, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 7:05 AM, Thom Brown wrote:
>> This was spotted by someone who sent in a doc comment, although didn't
>> go with their suggestion. Patch attached.
>
> That's not really a typo so much as a think-o, I think. Maybe a
> little more
On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 10:53:17PM +0530, Thom Brown wrote:
> On 7 March 2011 22:31, Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 6:16 AM, Thom Brown wrote:
> >> On 7 March 2011 15:27, Thom Brown wrote:
> >>> I've attached a small patch with a bit of clarification and a typo fix
> >>> in the sy
On 7 March 2011 20:49, Tom Lane wrote:
> Thom Brown writes:
>> Patch attached which corrects the docs where catalog functions no
>> longer accept values of type name. Originally a note submitted by
>> someone on the docs, but this affects more than just the one they
>> mentioned.
>
> The reason
On 7 March 2011 22:31, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 6:16 AM, Thom Brown wrote:
>> On 7 March 2011 15:27, Thom Brown wrote:
>>> I've attached a small patch with a bit of clarification and a typo fix
>>> in the synchronous_standby_names parameter info.
>>
>> Okay, I've noticed that
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 7:05 AM, Thom Brown wrote:
> This was spotted by someone who sent in a doc comment, although didn't
> go with their suggestion. Patch attached.
That's not really a typo so much as a think-o, I think. Maybe a
little more text would help clarify: A column-specific trigger (
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 6:16 AM, Thom Brown wrote:
> On 7 March 2011 15:27, Thom Brown wrote:
>> I've attached a small patch with a bit of clarification and a typo fix
>> in the synchronous_standby_names parameter info.
>
> Okay, I've noticed that the main documentation also needed some fixes,
> s
Thom Brown writes:
> Patch attached which corrects the docs where catalog functions no
> longer accept values of type name. Originally a note submitted by
> someone on the docs, but this affects more than just the one they
> mentioned.
The reason those are phrased as "OID or name" is that what t
Patch attached which corrects the docs where catalog functions no
longer accept values of type name. Originally a note submitted by
someone on the docs, but this affects more than just the one they
mentioned.
--
Thom Brown
Twitter: @darkixion
IRC (freenode): dark_ixion
Registered Linux user: #51
This was spotted by someone who sent in a doc comment, although didn't
go with their suggestion. Patch attached.
--
Thom Brown
Twitter: @darkixion
IRC (freenode): dark_ixion
Registered Linux user: #516935
for_update_of_typo_fix.patch
Description: Binary data
--
Sent via pgsql-docs mailing li
On 7 March 2011 15:27, Thom Brown wrote:
> I've attached a small patch with a bit of clarification and a typo fix
> in the synchronous_standby_names parameter info.
Okay, I've noticed that the main documentation also needed some fixes,
so those have been included in this new patch.
--
Thom Brow
I've attached a small patch with a bit of clarification and a typo fix
in the synchronous_standby_names parameter info.
--
Thom Brown
Twitter: @darkixion
IRC (freenode): dark_ixion
Registered Linux user: #516935
sync_rep_doc_fix.patch
Description: Binary data
--
Sent via pgsql-docs mailing li
27 matches
Mail list logo
