| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: SPITupleTable members missing in docs |
| Date: | 2019-06-17 02:10:29 |
| Message-ID: | 20190617021029.GH3153@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs |
On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 04:40:51PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> Yeah, that’s clearly an alternative. If we go down this route, then perhaps
> the docs should be swept for other instances (if any) and handle them all to
> keep things consistent? (and yes, I volunteer if we want to opt for that.)
FWIW, we still need a proper description of these fields in the docs,
so listing them in spi.sgml has the advantage to improve the grepping
coverage of which area needs to be patched. This structure not
updated actually shows that this argument can be wrong as well ;p
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2019-06-18 20:33:38 | Re: initdb recommendations |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2019-06-14 16:01:06 | Re: Mistake in documentation for CREATE STATISTICS |