Re: TABLE command
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: TABLE command |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 19886.1226171409@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: TABLE command ("Robert Haas" <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: TABLE command
Re: TABLE command Re: TABLE command |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
"Robert Haas" <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: > Incidentally, I noticed while looking at this that "\h with" also > fails, even though WITH can now be the first word of a valid SQL > statement. I think we ought to patch psql to return the same help for > WITH as it does for SELECT. Hmm. Given the current infrastructure for \h, the only way to do that would be to make a separate ref page for WITH, which feels like the wrong thing. And the objection I have to TABLE is not the code but the apparent need to give it its own ref page (as we already did for VALUES, and I found that pretty ugly too). Is there a way to make all of these point at the SELECT ref page? Something cleaner than a special hack in psql would be nice, but I guess I'd settle for that as still an improvement over considering that TABLE is a command. The problem with documenting VALUES and TABLE as commands is that this doesn't reflect their principal use as elements of a SELECT; and it also becomes quite unclear why you can't use, say, EXPLAIN or SHOW as elements of a SELECT. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: