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

Re: Suggestion on reorganizing functions

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>,Jeff <threshar(at)torgo(dot)978(dot)org>, pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Suggestion on reorganizing functions
Date: 2004-08-09 21:34:56
Message-ID: 20528.1092087296@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> writes:
> On Mon, Aug 09, 2004 at 11:20:33PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> A function index would be quite unreliable ("It's not in the
>> function index, so it's not supported.").  Feel free to add general
>> index entries for all functions, though.

> Where?

In func.sgml.  For example, this section seems adequately well indexed:

 <sect1 id="functions-sequence">
  <title>Sequence Manipulation Functions</title>

  <indexterm>
   <primary>sequence</primary>
  </indexterm>
  <indexterm>
   <primary>nextval</primary>
  </indexterm>
  <indexterm>
   <primary>currval</primary>
  </indexterm>
  <indexterm>
   <primary>setval</primary>
  </indexterm>

One thought though is that it's not clear when looking at the index that
these entries are function names.  Would it be useful to decorate them
somehow, eg by adding "()" to the names or setting them in a fixed-width
font?

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-docs by date

Next:From: David FetterDate: 2004-08-09 21:40:10
Subject: Re: Suggestion on reorganizing functions
Previous:From: David FetterDate: 2004-08-09 21:27:37
Subject: Re: Suggestion on reorganizing functions

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