Re: Should we document IS [NOT] OF?
От
Tom Lane
Тема
Re: Should we document IS [NOT] OF?
Дата
Msg-id
1214845.1605816848@sss.pgh.pa.us
Ответ на
Re: Should we document IS [NOT] OF? (Joe Conway)
Список
Дерево обсуждения
Should we document IS [NOT] OF? "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
Re: Should we document IS [NOT] OF? Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Should we document IS [NOT] OF? Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Should we document IS [NOT] OF? "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
Re: Should we document IS [NOT] OF? Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Should we document IS [NOT] OF? Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>
Re: Should we document IS [NOT] OF? Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Should we document IS [NOT] OF? Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>
Re: Should we document IS [NOT] OF? Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Re: Should we document IS [NOT] OF? Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Should we document IS [NOT] OF? Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>
Re: Should we document IS [NOT] OF? Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Should we document IS [NOT] OF? Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Should we document IS [NOT] OF? John Naylor <john.naylor@enterprisedb.com>
Re: Should we document IS [NOT] OF? Joshua Drake <jd@commandprompt.com>
Joe Conway writes: > On 11/19/20 12:08 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Here's a proposed patch for that. I was amused to discover that we have >> a couple of regression test cases making use of IS OF. > I didn't check but those might be my fault ;-) I suspect at least one of them is mine ;-). But I didn't check. > Looks good to me. Thanks for looking! regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления
