Re: DOCS - Server Applications [option] should be [option...]

From: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
To: Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: DOCS - Server Applications [option] should be [option...]
Date: 2026-02-23 14:47:57
Message-ID: 18D6F77A-A3FD-4DEE-8C79-D719F56D262F@yesql.se
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> On 17 Feb 2026, at 02:08, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> Make the "option" part consistent in the synopses of all Server Applications:
>
> 1. "[option]" should be "[option...]"

Only if the application can take multiple options. pg_controldata can for
example only take a single parameter so [option] is correct there.

> 2. It should be first

Why? I think it makes more sense to list [option...] after required parameters
just like how pg_upgrade does it. We might not be consistent as is, but I'm
not sure it's a net improvement to always list it first as opposed to what we
have.

--
Daniel Gustafsson

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2026-02-23 14:48:27 Re: Wrong results with grouping sets
Previous Message Daniel Gustafsson 2026-02-23 14:32:02 Re: Add ssl_(supported|shared)_groups to sslinfo