From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
---|---|
To: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
Subject: | Re: The case for removing replacement selection sort |
Date: | 2017-09-11 19:31:01 |
Message-ID: | CAH2-WzmYwvH1LSWJc59DKf7UNt8tprxjSM9k2-xhbu2nLFfX0w@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 2:55 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 2:47 PM, Thomas Munro
> <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>>> I attach a patch to remove replacement selection, which I'll submit to CF 1.
>>
>> This breaks the documentation build, because
>> doc/src/sgml/release-9.6.sgml still contains <xref
>> linkend="guc-replacement-sort-tuples"> but you removed that id.
>
> Thanks for looking into it.
>
> I suppose that the solution is to change the 9.6 release notes to no
> longer have a replacement_sort_tuples link. Anyone else have an
> opinion on that?
Attached is a revision of the patch that no longer breaks the
documentation build, by using a literal tag to refer to
replacement_sort_tuples within doc/src/sgml/release-9.6.sgml. The
patch is otherwise unchanged, and so reviewers shouldn't bother with
it (I just want to unbreak Thomas' continuous integration build, and
to save a committer the hassle of fixing the doc build themselves). I
verified that "make check-world" passes this time.
I also eyeballed the html generated by a "make STYLE=website html", to
ensure that it looked consistent with its surroundings. The resulting
9.6 release notes looked good to me.
--
Peter Geoghegan
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
0001-Remove-replacement-selection-sort.patch | text/x-patch | 34.8 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2017-09-11 19:33:42 | Re: More flexible LDAP auth search filters? |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2017-09-11 19:21:10 | Re: More flexible LDAP auth search filters? |