From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: osdba <mailtch@163.com>
Cc: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Document "59.2. Built-in Operator Classes" have a clerical error?
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2020 13:27:00 -0400
Message-ID: <2208818.1598117220@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200822165534.GD26781@momjian.us>
References: <20200821231616.GK13363@momjian.us>
<20200822031907.GA12615@alvherre.pgsql>
<20200822122319.GA24782@paquier.xyz>
<20200822165534.GD26781@momjian.us>
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> Yeah, I kind of like the table myself too, because this topic is already
> so complicated.
Agreed. I'm not very happy with the suggestion of "(multiple)" though;
I think that will just add confusion.
If you don't want to go all the way and list the operators with their
input types, maybe we should just do what the OP thought was correct
and delete the duplicate operator names. It's already the case that
the table isn't telling you exactly which input types the operators
accept, so why not be a little bit fuzzier?
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, bruce@momjian.us, michael@paquier.xyz, alvherre@2ndquadrant.com, mailtch@163.com
Subject: Re: Document "59.2. Built-in Operator Classes" have a clerical error?
In-Reply-To: <2208818.1598117220@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox