Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([98.129.198.125]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TGu1I-0001kH-Th for pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 15:59:29 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TGu1G-0005af-UK for pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 15:59:28 +0000 Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q8QFxQjw025888; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 11:59:26 -0400 (EDT) From: Tom Lane To: Bruce Momjian cc: barrybrown@sierracollege.edu, pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org, pgsql-docs@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [DOCS] BUG #7543: Invalid table alias: DELETE FROM table * In-reply-to: <20120926154159.GB11785@momjian.us> References: <5536.1347854286@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20120926154159.GB11785@momjian.us> Comments: In-reply-to Bruce Momjian message dated "Wed, 26 Sep 2012 11:41:59 -0400" Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 11:59:26 -0400 Message-ID: <25887.1348675166@sss.pgh.pa.us> X-Pg-Spam-Score: -2.7 (--) X-Archive-Number: 201209/272 X-Sequence-Number: 34266 Bruce Momjian writes: > Is there any value to having * vs just not using ONLY? I am not sure > documenting this is helping us, and it would add more clutter. Isn't > this like how we don't document the old COPY syntax. I beg your pardon? The old COPY syntax certainly is documented; see the bottom of the COPY reference page. We can't just not document it, or we'll get complaints exactly like this one. I'm not sure how come we didn't get some sooner. regards, tom lane