Re: Suggestion on reorganizing functions

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Jeff <threshar(at)torgo(dot)978(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Suggestion on reorganizing functions
Date: 2004-08-09 21:20:33
Message-ID: 200408092320.33165.peter_e@gmx.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs

Tom Lane wrote:
> I am not sure if DocBook could handle generating an index covering
> just functions, or if we'd have to merge it with the general index.

I think it's possible -- with a bit of programming work. I doubt,
however, that it's going to be all that useful. We're already having
trouble categorizing things like IS NULL (function?, operator?, special
construct?). A function index would be quite unreliable ("It's not in
the function index, so it's not supported."). Feel free to add general
index entries for all functions, though.

--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-docs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Fetter 2004-08-09 21:27:37 Re: Suggestion on reorganizing functions
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2004-08-09 21:15:53 Re: Suggestion on reorganizing functions