Subject: Re: Values list-of-targetlists patch for comments (was Re:
From: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Gavin Sherry <swm@linuxworld.com.au>, Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>,
	pgsql-patches@postgresql.org, pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
In-Reply-To: <18685.1154617090@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <44B69778.5050104@dunslane.net> <44B7ADFC.90205@dunslane.net>
	<44BC0432.3040509@joeconway.com> <44BC661F.80609@joeconway.com>
	<44CFFD2D.8040906@joeconway.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.58.0608031523090.4590@linuxworld.com.au>
	<18685.1154617090@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2006 21:35:09 +0100
Message-Id: <1154723709.2495.14.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Thu, 2006-08-03 at 10:58 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Gavin Sherry <swm@linuxworld.com.au> writes:
> > Docs and regression tests attached.
> 
> I've applied the regression tests (with a few additions), but I'm
> feeling dissatisfied with this approach to documenting VALUES.
> It seems to be mostly missing the point about VALUES being usable
> whereever SELECT is.  I'm not at all sure what I'd do instead though.
> Should we give VALUES its own reference page?  That doesn't quite
> seem helpful either.  cc'ing to pgsql-docs for ideas.

The DB2 manual does exactly that and is not any clearer as a result,
even if it is fully normalised.

If we did that we'd need to emphasise that VALUES is more of a clause
than a new command.

-- 
  Simon Riggs
  EnterpriseDB          http://www.enterprisedb.com