Re: enhance wraparound warnings

Hi,

On Tue, Aug 4, 2026 at 12:26 AM Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> So, my understanding of the discussion is:
>
> - Bharath preferred the wording without "space", but said he was fine with
> the majority.
> - Kyotaro thought the wording with "space" was clearer, because it makes
> explicit what the percentage is relative to.
> - Nathan had no strong preference.
> - Yugo also slightly leaned toward keeping "space".
>
> So, taking these opinions together, I think the wording with "space" is the
> better choice here. Unless there are further objections, I plan to commit
> the patch with that wording.

WFM. Thanks for summarizing.

> > This also replaces "XIDs" with "transaction IDs" in the surrounding explanatory text.
> > I'm not sure this change is necessary, since that text is not part of the example output,
> > and "XID" is already used elsewhere in the same paragraph.
>
> I've updated 0002 patch as suggested. Thanks for the review!

I looked at both patches and they look good to me. pgindent is happy too.

Just a quick question: is the documentation change considered
backpatchable when the source commit exists in older versions? I mean,
does it fall into the bug or inconsistency category that qualifies for
backpatching?

--
Bharath Rupireddy
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com