On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 07:31:53PM -0400, Josh Kupershmidt wrote:
> I'd like to propose the following slight rewording for the note about ALTER
> TABLE ... ADDÂ table_constraint_using_index. The existing text says one may
> "install it [the existing index] as an official constraint".
>
> The "offic
On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 08:36:34AM +0100, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> On Wed, 2023-11-22 at 14:49 -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> > I don't think that your proposed wording for this is an improvement.
>
> Well, the existing wording is impenetrable even for someone with some
> PostgreSQL knowledge, like
On Fri, 2023-11-24 at 12:29 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 09:29:39AM +0100, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> > On Wed, 2023-11-22 at 11:58 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > Okay, I moved it into the "Note" section that talked about ISO 8601
> > > output with "T", in the attached patch.
On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 09:29:39AM +0100, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> On Wed, 2023-11-22 at 11:58 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Okay, I moved it into the "Note" section that talked about ISO 8601
> > output with "T", in the attached patch.
>
> Fine by me, except that I would rather have "returns" or "
Hello
Here
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/infoschema-routine-column-usage.html
it is stated that "The view routine_column_usage is meant to identify all
columns that are used by a function or procedure. This information is currently
not tracked by PostgreSQL."
However, this claim is i
