On 2022-Aug-12, Simon Riggs wrote: > Sorry, but I disagree with this chunk in the latest commit, > specifically, changing the MATCHED from after to before the NOT > MATCHED clause. > > The whole point of the second example was to demonstrate that the > order of the MATCHED/NOT MATCHED clauses made no difference. > > By changing the examples so they are the same, the sentence at line > 573 now makes no sense.
Not sure how to fix this. We could add put the WHEN clauses in the order they were, and add another phrase to that paragraph to explain more explicitly that the order is not relevant (while at the same time explaining that if you have multiple WHEN MATCHED clauses, the relative order of those *is* relevant). -- Álvaro Herrera 48°01'N 7°57'E — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/ "At least to kernel hackers, who really are human, despite occasional rumors to the contrary" (LWN.net)
