Re: [DOCS] Two points about docs

2005-05-11 Thread Michael Glaesemann
On May 11, 2005, at 15:50, Vladimir Chukharev wrote: And I still think that an additional Appendix with a list of all functions and referencies to their descriptions would be very usefull. Can you comment on that? This has been brought up in the past. I don't think there's any reason there can't b

Re: [DOCS] Two points about docs

2005-05-11 Thread Bruce Momjian
Vladimir Chukharev wrote: > On Tue, 10 May 2005 04:50:16 +0300, Bruce Momjian > wrote: > > > Vladimir Chukharev wrote: > >> About the link to the lo_* functions. I thought about adding > >> a sentence to Charpter 9 like 'And functions to manipulate large > >> objects are presented in Charpter 28

Re: [DOCS] Two points about docs

2005-05-11 Thread Tom Lane
Michael Glaesemann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On May 11, 2005, at 15:50, Vladimir Chukharev wrote: >> And I still think that an additional Appendix with a list of all >> functions and referencies to their descriptions would be very usefull. >> Can you comment on that? > This has been brought up

Re: [DOCS] Two points about docs

2005-05-11 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian writes: > !consistent between the various implementations. This chapter is also > !not exhaustive; additional functions appear in relivant sections of > !the manual. "relevant", please. regards, tom lane ---(end of bro

Re: [DOCS] Two points about docs

2005-05-11 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian writes: > > !consistent between the various implementations. This chapter is also > > !not exhaustive; additional functions appear in relivant sections of > > !the manual. > > "relevant", please. Yea, Neil got it. -- Bruce Momjian

Re: [DOCS] Two points about docs

2005-05-11 Thread Michael Glaesemann
On May 11, 2005, at 22:39, Tom Lane wrote: Michael Glaesemann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: This has been brought up in the past. I don't think there's any reason there can't be one. Want to make a function appendix? :) I think this is more conventionally called an index ;-) Hehe :) Thanks, Tom! I do

[DOCS] create rule syntax

2005-05-11 Thread Kris Jurka
The manual shows slightly different variations for the create rule syntax here and here: http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.0/static/rules-update.html http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.0/static/sql-createrule.html The attached patches makes the first look like the second. The key change is that i