Re: [DOCS] Remove name as valid parameter for catalog functions

On 7 March 2011 20:49, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com> writes:
>> Patch attached which corrects the docs where catalog functions no
>> longer accept values of type name.  Originally a note submitted by
>> someone on the docs, but this affects more than just the one they
>> mentioned.
>
> The reason those are phrased as "OID or name" is that what they take is
> regclass, which means that things like pg_total_relation_size('table_name')
> do in fact work.  I think the proposed wording would leave people with
> the idea that they had to supply a numeric OID, which is a PITA and not
> by any means the expected usage.  I agree that maybe the original
> wording could use some improvement, but I don't think that just removing
> "or name" is an improvement.

That's fair enough, but it still needs changing, as whilst an OID
won't cause an error, a field with the type of name will. Is it
reasonable to refer to a parameter as required to be of type regclass?

--
Thom Brown
Twitter: @darkixion
IRC (freenode): dark_ixion
Registered Linux user: #516935