Re: [RFC] grants vs. inherited tables - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [RFC] grants vs. inherited tables
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoY2_JqYMuSLsvYgfZ-TEFbN+5jN4j+7dWNA8wMVXWu1xQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [RFC] grants vs. inherited tables  (Marko Kreen <markokr@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 4:25 AM, Marko Kreen <markokr@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I have the (hopefully wrong) impression that you're missing the fact
>> that it already exists, at least in 9.0.
>
> You are right, I missed it.  For quite obvious reason:
>
>  $ grep -ri aclexplode doc/
>  $
>
> Is there a good reason why it's undocumented?  Internal/unstable API?
> I better avoid it then.  But I would like to have this or similar
> function as part of public API.

I don't see any real reason why we couldn't document this one.  It
returns OIDs, but that's the name of the game if you're doing anything
non-trivial with PostgreSQL system catalogs.  Off-hand I'm not quite
sure which section of the documentation would be appropriate, though.
It looks like the functions we provide are mostly documented in
chapter 9, Functions and Operators.  Section 9.23 on "System
Information Functions" seems like it's probably the closest fit...

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2
Next
From: "Kevin Grittner"
Date:
Subject: Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2