Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, 4 Aug 2006, Michael Glaesemann wrote:
>> On Aug 3, 2006, at 23:58 , Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Should we give VALUES its own reference page? That doesn't quite
>>> seem helpful either.
>>
>> I think we should go for a separate reference page, as VALUES
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Gavin Sherry wrote:
>> What do we want to do about documenting:
>> regression=# values(1);
> Out of curiosity, according to what theory should that be allowed?
Wrong question. SELECT (for the general case of multi-row results)
and VALUES are exactly
Gavin Sherry wrote:
> What do we want to do about documenting:
>
> regression=# values(1);
Out of curiosity, according to what theory should that be allowed?
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP
On Aug 4, 2006, at 9:42 , Gavin Sherry wrote:
... with update? I associate it very closely with INSERT. After all,
INSERT is the only statement where we've had VALUES as part of the
grammar.
Of course! Thanks for catching the glitch. I must have a bad RAM chip.
Michael Glaesemann
grzm seespo
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Should we give VALUES its own reference page? That doesn't quite
seem helpful either. cc'ing to pgsql-docs for ideas.
This is probably the sort of thing that should be explained part II "The
SQL Language". In particular, section 7.2 is about table e
Tom Lane wrote:
> Should we give VALUES its own reference page? That doesn't quite
> seem helpful either. cc'ing to pgsql-docs for ideas.
This is probably the sort of thing that should be explained part II "The
SQL Language". In particular, section 7.2 is about table expressions,
which this i
On Aug 3, 2006, at 23:58 , Tom Lane wrote:
Should we give VALUES its own reference page? That doesn't quite
seem helpful either.
I think we should go for a separate reference page, as VALUES appears
to be expanding quite a bit. Up till now I've thought of VALUES only
in conjunction with
Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Docs and regression tests attached.
I've applied the regression tests (with a few additions), but I'm
feeling dissatisfied with this approach to documenting VALUES.
It seems to be mostly missing the point about VALUES being usable
whereever SELECT is. I'
