Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Additional index entries and table sorting

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-docs <pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Additional index entries and table sorting
Date: 2010-10-28 18:59:23
Message-ID: 1288292363.30480.5.camel@vanquo.pezone.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docspgsql-hackers
On sön, 2010-09-26 at 18:07 +0100, Thom Brown wrote:
> On 26 September 2010 17:49, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com> wrote:
> > I attach a patch which adds all functions (or at least the ones I
> > found) into the index so that they can be easily located.  Previously
> > there were no entries for most of these at all in the index.  I also
> > removed the entries for count, max, min and sum in the tutorial area
> > as per this discussion:
> > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-docs/2010-09/msg00119.php .
> > These are no indexed on the aggregate function page.
> >
> > While I was updating the functions section, I also alphabetised any
> > unsorted function tables.
> 
> I don't think my email reached the list, so reattaching a gzipped version.

Took a quick look now.  What I find weird is that in some hunks you
remove index entries from a table and place them in the surrounding
section, and in other places you insert new index entries inside tables.
I think the proper place for the index entries tends to be inside the
table.


In response to

Responses

pgsql-docs by date

Next:From: Thom BrownDate: 2010-10-28 19:15:14
Subject: Re: Additional index entries and table sorting
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2010-10-28 01:30:44
Subject: Re: formula about the number of WAL files

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Thom BrownDate: 2010-10-28 19:15:14
Subject: Re: Additional index entries and table sorting
Previous:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2010-10-28 18:41:36
Subject: Re: plperl arginfo

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group