From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Nikolay Shaplov <n(dot)shaplov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH][Documination] Add optional USING keyword before opclass name in INSERT statemet |
Date: | 2016-05-31 19:38:38 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmobTbtbdTqVQMv9XQctO26ENv8ur9vjqg3xDsLfBdNrEQQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 12:34 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 3:28 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> 99% of the time, you'd be right. But this is an unusual case, for the
>>> reasons I mentioned before.
>
>> I tend to agree with Nikolay. I can't see much upside in making this
>> change. At best, nothing will break. At worst, something will break.
>> But how do we actually come out ahead?
>
> We come out ahead by not having to make the documentation more confusing.
>
> Basically, we have the opportunity to fix an ancient mistake here at
> very low cost. I do not think that doubling down on the mistake is
> a better answer.
I'm not convinced, but we don't have to agree on everything...
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David G. Johnston | 2016-05-31 19:43:23 | Re: Rename max_parallel_degree? |
Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2016-05-31 19:37:52 | Re: Rename max_parallel_degree? |