Improve docs around the use of the TIMESTAMP field #783
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…in the CREATE statements, and the default behaviour where it is not supplied.
joel-hamill
approved these changes
Feb 27, 2018
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@big-andy-coates changes look good. please rebase and migrate into the newly migrated .rst source.
# Conflicts: # docs/syntax-reference.md
dguy
approved these changes
Feb 27, 2018
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
To resolve #782
While working through the docs it was not very clear to me what the TIMESTAMP property on the CREATE calls was doing. Here's a stab at clarifying their purpose...
Assuming my assumptions on how it works are correct, what is still not clear to me is what the behavior would be if TIMESTAMP was not supplied where the SELECT was a join. Which source would it take the timestamp from?