Re: doc: create table improvements

From: Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>
Cc: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, jian he <jian(dot)universality(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: doc: create table improvements
Date: 2025-12-16 02:14:00
Message-ID: 63CD263B-E821-43BB-9B22-48C48326D663@gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> On Oct 23, 2025, at 12:43, Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2025-10-20 at 07:41 -0400, David G. Johnston wrote:
>> I question whether “parameter” is even the correct class to assign here
>> and so would rather avoid the issue by not assigning a class.
>
> Right. I have removed the vestiges from my failed attempt to improve
> the "parameter" decorations.
>
>> “If none is specified, the data will be persistent” would be better
>> written “If unspecified the data will be persistent” (or, “if not specified…”)
>
> I decided to use the trusted phrasing "by default".
>
>> Everything else looks good.
>
> Patch attached; if it is fine with you, I'll mark it "ready for committer".
>
> Yours,
> Laurenz Albe
> <v4-0001-Unclutter-CREATE-TABLE-synopsis.patch>

Overall the change looks good to me. I have only one comment about the naming of “oversize_storage”. Why not just “storage_parameters” or similar that sounds more straightforward?

Best regards,
--
Chao Li (Evan)
HighGo Software Co., Ltd.
https://www.highgo.com/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message cca5507 2025-12-16 02:33:15 Re: [PATCH] Add pg_lfind8_nonzero()
Previous Message Euler Taveira 2025-12-16 01:47:12 Re: Improve logical replication usability when tables lack primary keys