Re: Should we document IS [NOT] OF?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Should we document IS [NOT] OF?
Date: 2020-11-19 07:03:59
Message-ID: 1028344.1605769439@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"David G. Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Is there a feature code? I skimmed the standard and non-standard tables in
> our appendix and couldn’t find this in either.

a19d9d3c4 seems to have thought it was S151.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com 2020-11-19 07:07:34 RE: [Patch] Optimize dropping of relation buffers using dlist
Previous Message David G. Johnston 2020-11-19 06:59:42 Re: Should we document IS [NOT] OF?