On Mon, Aug 15, 2022 at 10:53:18PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 13, 2022 at 10:21:26PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> > > Hi, I agree we should show the more modern JOIN sytax. However, this is
> > > just an example, so one example should be sufficient. I went with the
> > > first one in the attached patch.
> >
> > You should not remove the CROSS JOIN mention at l. 604, first because
> > the references to it just below would become odd, and second because
> > then it's not explained anywhere on the page. Perhaps you could
> > put back a definition of CROSS JOIN just below the entry for NATURAL,
> > but you'll still have to do something with the references at l. 614,
> > 628, 632.
>
> Good point. I restrutured the docs to move CROSS JOIN to a separate
> section like NATURAL and adjusted the text, patch attached.
Patch applied back to PG 11. PG 10 was different enough and old enough
that I skipped it. This is a big improvement. Thanks.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
Indecision is a decision. Inaction is an action. Mark Batterson
