From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
Cc: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Lætitia Avrot <laetitia(dot)avrot(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Adding column_constraint description in ALTER TABLE synopsis |
Date: | 2018-02-02 10:41:57 |
Message-ID: | 20180202104157.GS2416@tamriel.snowman.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Greetings,
* Amit Langote (Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp) wrote:
> On 2018/01/23 8:57, Thomas Munro wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 12:41 PM, Thomas Munro
> > <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> >> On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 2:32 PM, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:
> >>> If someone else would like to review it, that'd be great, otherwise I'll
> >>> probably get it committed soon.
> >>
> >> FYI the v2 doesn't build:
> >>
> >> ref/alter_table.sgml:135: parser error : Opening and ending tag
> >> mismatch: refentry line 6 and synopsis
> >> </synopsis>
> >
> > Here's an update to move the new stuff to the correct side of the
> > closing "</synopsis>". Builds for me, and the typesetting looks OK.
> > I'm not sure why the preexisting bogo-productions have inconsistent
> > indentation levels (looking at table_constraint_using_index) but
> > that's not this patch's fault.
>
> Thanks for fixing that.
>
> I noticed that partition_bound_spec in the patch is missing hash partition
> bound syntax that was added after the original patch was written. Fixed
> in the attached.
I've pushed this with just a bit of re-ordering to match the order in
which things show up in the synopsis.
Thanks!
Stephen
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Etsuro Fujita | 2018-02-02 10:43:40 | Re: [HACKERS] Add support for tuple routing to foreign partitions |
Previous Message | Pierre Ducroquet | 2018-02-02 10:40:49 | Re: JIT compiling with LLVM v9.1 |