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
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs pgsql-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

Browse pgsql-docs by date

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

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

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