| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Vik Fearing <vik(dot)fearing(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, nawaz(at)fast(dot)au(dot)fujitsu(dot)com, pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: typo |
| Date: | 2018-11-27 01:35:01 |
| Message-ID: | 20181127013501.GB1716@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs |
On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 09:14:18AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> But I can see that a lot of people might not be familiar with that usage,
> so I've got no objections to rewriting it more clearly --- any
> suggestions?
It has been suggested upthread to use "in the table rows themselves",
which does not sound bad to me. So that would give, quoting the whole
portion:
A table that has columns with potentially large entries will have an
associated <firstterm>TOAST</firstterm> table, which is used for
out-of-line storage of
-field values that are too large to keep in the table rows properly.
+field values that are too large to keep in the table rows themselves.
<structname>pg_class</structname>.<structfield>reltoastrelid</structfield>
links from a table to
its <acronym>TOAST</acronym> table, if any.
Now I cannot really stand as somebody able to decide the right thing on
this thread, proofs present on the table ;)
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2018-11-27 01:44:30 | Re: missing windows info |
| Previous Message | Ahmed, Nawaz | 2018-11-27 01:24:36 | RE: typo |