From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Thom Brown <thom@linux.com>
Cc: pgsql-docs <pgsql-docs@postgresql.org>
Cc: pgadmin-hackers <pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: [DOCS] Remove name as valid parameter for catalog functions
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2011 10:19:00 -0500
Message-ID: <23947.1299511140@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikyHfvSDYYmKT9xqLhHid_CrLSqWE519yPqkdbL@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTikyHfvSDYYmKT9xqLhHid_CrLSqWE519yPqkdbL@mail.gmail.com>
Thom Brown <thom@linux.com> writes:
> Patch attached which corrects the docs where catalog functions no
> longer accept values of type name. Originally a note submitted by
> someone on the docs, but this affects more than just the one they
> mentioned.
The reason those are phrased as "OID or name" is that what they take is
regclass, which means that things like pg_total_relation_size('table_name')
do in fact work. I think the proposed wording would leave people with
the idea that they had to supply a numeric OID, which is a PITA and not
by any means the expected usage. I agree that maybe the original
wording could use some improvement, but I don't think that just removing
"or name" is an improvement.
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, thom@linux.com, pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [DOCS] Remove name as valid parameter for catalog functions
In-Reply-To: <23947.1299511140@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