| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Marko Tiikkaja <marko(dot)tiikkaja(at)cs(dot)helsinki(dot)fi>, Takahiro Itagaki <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Review of Writeable CTE Patch |
| Date: | 2010-02-03 16:13:47 |
| Message-ID: | 11405.1265213627@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 10:58 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> We could probably make that work for error messages, but what about
>> documentation? It's going to be awkward to write something like
>> "INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE RETURNING" every time we need to make a general
>> statement about the behavior of all three.
> The current patch includes a total of 5 lines of text documenting this
> new feature (plus one example), so the issue doesn't really arise.
Well, that's certainly not going to be nearly sufficient. I think what
you meant is "Marko hasn't bothered with documentation". There is going
to need to be discussion in the RULES chapter, in the page describing
returned command tags, and probably six other places that aren't coming
to me in the time it takes to type this sentence.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Marko Tiikkaja | 2010-02-03 16:18:17 | Re: Review of Writeable CTE Patch |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-02-03 16:11:12 | Re: [CFReview] Red-Black Tree |