| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Clarification to catalog-pg-class |
| Date: | 2009-02-11 09:23:30 |
| Message-ID: | 49929912.9070803@gmx.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs |
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Josh Berkus wrote:
>> Bruce,
>>
>>>> Currently, catalog-pg-class is a bit confusing as to where FKs are
>>>> tracked in pg_class. Please update the lines for relchecks and
>>>> reltriggers to read:
>>>>
>>>> relchecks int2 Number of check constraints on the table (but not
>>>> other types of constraints); see pg_constraint catalog
>>> Uh, why do we have to say "but" when we clearly say "check constraints"?
>>> Do we need to say "CHECK" contraints?
>> Because I've encountered two people on IRC (and a client) who were
>> confused about this, and it confused me briefly when I fielded their
>> questions. Saying "CHECK constraints" would also probably do it, or
>> saying "check constraints (only)"
>
> Uppercase done, with <literal> tag.
This is inconsistent with the rest of the documentation.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2009-02-12 03:17:12 | Re: Clarification to catalog-pg-class |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2009-02-09 14:10:00 | Re: typo in ref/psql-ref.sgml |