Re: Doc Patch: Subquery section to say that subqueries can't modify data
От | Vik Fearing |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Doc Patch: Subquery section to say that subqueries can't modify data |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 525D5469.8000604@dalibo.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Doc Patch: Subquery section to say that subqueries can't modify data ("Karl O. Pinc" <kop@meme.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 08/06/2013 11:03 PM, Karl O. Pinc wrote: > The attached documentation patch, doc-subqueries-v1.patch, > applies against head. > > I wanted to document that subqueries can't modify data. > This is mentioned in the documentation for SELECT and > implied elsewhere but I was looking for something more > than an 'in-passing' mention. > > (I wrote a bad query, > modifying data in a subquery, couldn't recall where > it was documented that you can't do this, and couldn't > find the answer from the TOC or the index. Now that > there's lots of statements with RETURNING clauses > it's natural to want to use them in subqueries.) Hello, I am (finally) reviewing this patch. After reading your reasoning, David's rebuttal, and the patch itself; I'm wondering if this is needed or wanted at all. Supposing it is wanted, it creates more questions than it answers. The two biggies are: * In what other contexts can tabular subqueries be used? * What are other ways of integrating data returned by data modification statements? On a superficial level I find the number of commas a bit clunky, and "parentheses" is misspelled. > The last 2 sentences of the first paragraph are > something in the way of helpful hints and may not > be appropriate, or even accurate. I've left them in > for review. I think the last sentence (of the first paragraph) is a bit much, but the penultimate seems fine. I'm attaching an updated patch that I think is an improvement but it's still at a draft level and needs more copyediting. This new patch does not attempt to answer the two questions above. -- Vik
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: