"Robert Haas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Incidentally, I noticed while looking at this that "\h with" also
> fails, even though WITH can now be the first word of a valid SQL
> statement. I think we ought to patch psql to return the same help for
> WITH as it does for SELECT.
Hmm. Given the current infrastructure for \h, the only way to do that
would be to make a separate ref page for WITH, which feels like the
wrong thing. And the objection I have to TABLE is not the code but the
apparent need to give it its own ref page (as we already did for VALUES,
and I found that pretty ugly too).
Is there a way to make all of these point at the SELECT ref page?
Something cleaner than a special hack in psql would be nice, but
I guess I'd settle for that as still an improvement over considering
that TABLE is a command. The problem with documenting VALUES and
TABLE as commands is that this doesn't reflect their principal use
as elements of a SELECT; and it also becomes quite unclear why you can't
use, say, EXPLAIN or SHOW as elements of a SELECT.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
