Re: pg_plan_advice

On Fri, Feb 27, 2026 at 6:16 PM David G. Johnston <
david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 27, 2026 at 3:46 PM Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Feb 26, 2026 at 8:55 AM Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
>> wrote:
>> > Thanks, Alex, for the review.
>>
>> Here's v18. In addition to fixing the problems pointed out by Alex,
>> there are a couple of significant changes in this version.
>>
>>
> I have a mind to walk through the readmes and sgmls but its going to be in
> chunks. Here's one for the readme for pg_plan_advice with a couple of
> preliminary sgml changes.
>
>
0003 sgml focus with some readme.

There is an inconsistency between readme and sgml regarding the "join
(strategy|method) advice" label.

The wording for partitionwise is better in the readme than the sgml.

I did make some bulkier suggestions - they do not contain proper markup.

There may be some repeated suggestions from my previous review - I didn't
try to match up what you did and did not take in.

I re-ordered semijoin to be alphabetical - which also had the benefit of
matching the layout of the paragraph. Flipping the order of "former" and
"latter" is quite intentional.

I defined what "successfully enforced" means in the emit warning GUC. That
was my unresearched guess after reading how "failed" behaves.

I found "negative join order constraint" challenging to parse. I tried to
word it more like what is done in the readme.

I don't know if this conflicts with my previous diff of the same patch. A
couple of overlap spots possibly but they were largely independent (readme
then, sgml now).

David J.