Re: doc: create table improvements

From: Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>
To: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: 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: 2025-10-23 04:43:25
Message-ID: ab574da206f7cb0db340671d88eff4ae9d66e450.camel@cybertec.at
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

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

Attachment Content-Type Size
v4-0001-Unclutter-CREATE-TABLE-synopsis.patch text/x-patch 5.1 KB

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2025-10-23 04:48:37 Re: POC: enable logical decoding when wal_level = 'replica' without a server restart
Previous Message David Rowley 2025-10-23 04:33:08 Re: Issue with query_is_distinct_for() and grouping sets