This sounds like an oxymoron to me. Perhaps that sentence should be changed
to:
The boolean type can have one of three states: "true" or "false" and
"unknown".
if my boolean arithmetic is not wrong the above expression is bad.
better expressed is: "true", "false" or "unknown"...
There
Jack Douglas wrote:
> There are two kinds of people on this earth, those who understand
> boolean arithmatic and those who don't. I'm not one of them.
Hmmm... From that, I don't know if you do. Which do I record in the
understands_boolean column of the database record for you? Dang, I
knew
Hi,
I think that createuser/drouser reference documentation could be
enhanced for username param. There is:
"createuser is a wrapper around the SQL command CREATE ROLE. There is
no effective difference between creating users via this utility and
via other methods for accessing the server."
http:
I have question about Table 4-2. Operator Precedence (decreasing) on
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.0/static/sql-syntax-lexical.html. I
see there is '-' unary (unary minus) operator listed, but I can't see
'+' (unary plus) prefix operator there. I think that it does not
belong to "(any other)" gr
I noticed that pg_role.rolconfig isn't documented in catalog.sgml. Is
this an oversight? Are other things missing?
--
Bruce Momjian http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
--
Sent via pgs
Grzegorz Szpetkowski writes:
> I have question about Table 4-2. Operator Precedence (decreasing) on
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.0/static/sql-syntax-lexical.html. I
> see there is '-' unary (unary minus) operator listed, but I can't see
> '+' (unary plus) prefix operator there.
Hm, yeah, th
Bruce Momjian writes:
> I noticed that pg_role.rolconfig isn't documented in catalog.sgml. Is
> this an oversight? Are other things missing?
ITYM pg_roles? Yeah, that column seems to be missing. And the claim
that it's "simply a view of pg_authid" is obsolete too, precisely
because this colum
