> On 31 Aug 2017, at 04:42, Peter Eisentraut
> wrote:
>
> On 8/30/17 13:28, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>>> On 30 Aug 2017, at 16:51, Tom Lane wrote:
>>>
>>> Alvaro Herrera writes:
Uh, why would anybody be reading the pg10 docs in order to compile
modules for 8.2? I vote to just drop
On 8/30/17 13:28, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> On 30 Aug 2017, at 16:51, Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>> Alvaro Herrera writes:
>>> Uh, why would anybody be reading the pg10 docs in order to compile
>>> modules for 8.2? I vote to just drop the suggestion that there needs to
>>> be an #ifdef guard altogethe
David, Bruce,
* David G. Johnston (david.g.johns...@gmail.com) wrote:
> The CREATE VIEW documentation links to
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.6/static/rules-privileges.html
>
> which covers this dynamic in considerable detail (and there is a blurb on
> the CREATE VIEW page as well), and s
The CREATE VIEW documentation links to
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.6/static/rules-privileges.html
which covers this dynamic in considerable detail (and there is a blurb on
the CREATE VIEW page as well), and specifically:
"Relations that are used due to rules get checked against the privile
Stephen, is there anything missing in our docs related this issue?
---
On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 02:25:11PM +, deinspan...@gmail.com wrote:
> The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
>
> Page: h
On 30 August 2017 at 14:46, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 03:43:22PM +, davecra...@gmail.com wrote:
> > The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
> >
> > Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.6/static/sql-deallocate.html
> > Description:
> >
> > It
On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 03:43:22PM +, davecra...@gmail.com wrote:
> The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
>
> Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.6/static/sql-deallocate.html
> Description:
>
> It's not clear that temp_buffers determine the size of a temp tab
> On 30 Aug 2017, at 16:51, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Alvaro Herrera writes:
>> Uh, why would anybody be reading the pg10 docs in order to compile
>> modules for 8.2? I vote to just drop the suggestion that there needs to
>> be an #ifdef guard altogether.
>
> +1 ... if you are reading the current do
> On 30 Aug 2017, at 16:35, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> With 8.1 being fairly far down on the EOL list, it seems about time to update
>> the docs regarding PG_MODULE_MAGIC to mention the pre-8.2 #ifdef guards as an
>> exception and not the default. Not sure if a Note sh
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Uh, why would anybody be reading the pg10 docs in order to compile
> modules for 8.2? I vote to just drop the suggestion that there needs to
> be an #ifdef guard altogether.
+1 ... if you are reading the current docs, they're going to tell you
lots of things that won't w
Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> With 8.1 being fairly far down on the EOL list, it seems about time to update
> the docs regarding PG_MODULE_MAGIC to mention the pre-8.2 #ifdef guards as an
> exception and not the default. Not sure if a Note should be used, or just a
> paragraph, so opted for a paragra
With 8.1 being fairly far down on the EOL list, it seems about time to update
the docs regarding PG_MODULE_MAGIC to mention the pre-8.2 #ifdef guards as an
exception and not the default. Not sure if a Note should be used, or just a
paragraph, so opted for a paragraph.
This also removes the last t
12 matches
Mail list logo
