On 9/20/24 19:31, Marcos Pegoraro wrote:
> Em sex., 20 de set. de 2024 às 12:53, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us
> <mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>> escreveu:
>
> As far as the mentions in "Data Type Formatting Functions" go, those
> are there because those functions are not in the SQL standard; we
> stole the API definitions for them from Oracle, lock stock and barrel.
> (Except for the discrepancies that are called out by referencing what
> Oracle does differently.) A number of the other references probably
> have similar origins.
>
>
> All the time we see somebody adding a new function to Postgres core that
> exists in Python or GO or MySQL, but none of them are mentioned on DOCS.
>
Which Python/Go/MySQL functions we added to Postgres, for example?
AFAIK we're now adding stuff that is either described by SQL standard,
or stuff that's our own invention. Neither cases would benefit from
explaining how other products behave. That's very different from the
interfaces we copied from Oracle.
> I did never use Oracle but I'm almost sure on Oracle DOCS there are no
> mentions of Postgres, right ? Why do we need to mention it ?
>
I think Tom already explained that we copied a lot of this stuff from
Oracle, so it makes sense to explain in which cases the behavior
differs. I don't see how removing this would help users, it'd very
clearly make life harder for them.
I'm no fan of Oracle corp myself, but I admit I don't quite understand
why you're upset with the handful of places mentioning the product.
regards
--
Tomas Vondra
