Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

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 (view raw or flat)
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

pgsql-docs by date

Next:From: David FetterDate: 2004-08-09 21:27:37
Subject: Re: Suggestion on reorganizing functions
Previous:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2004-08-09 21:15:53
Subject: Re: Suggestion on reorganizing functions

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group