Re: A Typo in regress/sql/privileges.sql

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Tatsuro Yamada <yamada(dot)tatsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: A Typo in regress/sql/privileges.sql
Date: 2015-12-18 20:52:50
Message-ID: CA+TgmobV8AZBwCKuroHjucwCxWMgd06+r-R_xJ=i0wt78UMYag@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 1:57 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> On 2015-12-18 13:50:34 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 11:51 PM, Tatsuro Yamada
>> <yamada(dot)tatsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
>> > I found typos in privileges.sql and privileges.out
>> > Please find attached a patch.
>>
>> Thanks, good catch. But even aside from this particular issue, isn't
>> that comment in need of a little more love? An inference means a
>> deduction, or something you can figure out from something else. ON
>> CONFLICT (four) is not an inference.
>
> It's the index(es) that are inferred, from the ON(columns) and the ON
> CONFLICT's WHERE clause. If we want to get rid of that terminology we'd
> need to start elsewhere, and it'd be a bigger patch.

It might be an inference specification, but there is no way that it is
an inference. If we use that terminology in other places, it's wrong
there, too.

Mind you, I don't think "inference specification" is very good
terminology, but what's there right now is just wrong.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2015-12-18 20:55:10 Re: Refactoring speculative insertion with unique indexes a little
Previous Message Robert Haas 2015-12-18 20:50:18 Re: Using quicksort for every external sort run