Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [209.114.132.154])
	by mail.postgresql.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBUI5IL02101
	for <pgsql-docs@postgresql.org>; Sat, 30 Dec 2000 13:05:18 -0500 (EST)
	(envelope-from tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us)
Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBUI55C03298;
	Sat, 30 Dec 2000 13:05:05 -0500 (EST)
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
cc: Paul Govereau <pgoverea@akamai.com>, pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Inheritance docs error. 
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0012301543410.776-100000@peter.localdomain> 
References: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0012301543410.776-100000@peter.localdomain>
Comments: In-reply-to Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
	message dated "Sat, 30 Dec 2000 15:47:20 +0100"
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 13:05:05 -0500
Message-ID: <3295.978199505@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
X-Archive-Number: 200012/82
X-Sequence-Number: 129

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
>> It seems that the last one is correct -- or at least works for me.

> They are all correct:  UNDER is the new SQL99 syntax, INHERITS is the
> traditional Postgres syntax.

Current docs do appear to be erroneous: they claim the UNDER phrase goes
where INHERIT does, which is not what the grammar thinks.  I haven't
looked at SQL99 to see which is right.

			regards, tom lane