Subject: Re: Additional index entries and table sorting
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
To: Thom Brown <thom@linux.com>
Cc: pgsql-docs <pgsql-docs@postgresql.org>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikDJ_7fsPhjLjMLTLSBWsX=WfUzXFgeMAyN2R53@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTimUnynhY26SLUQW2_FpeG3Y-fgqmTwND8pUmvQt@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikDJ_7fsPhjLjMLTLSBWsX=WfUzXFgeMAyN2R53@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2010 21:59:23 +0300
Message-ID: <1288292363.30480.5.camel@vanquo.pezone.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

On sön, 2010-09-26 at 18:07 +0100, Thom Brown wrote:
> On 26 September 2010 17:49, Thom Brown <thom@linux.com> wrote:
> > I attach a patch which adds all functions (or at least the ones I
> > found) into the index so that they can be easily located.  Previously
> > there were no entries for most of these at all in the index.  I also
> > removed the entries for count, max, min and sum in the tutorial area
> > as per this discussion:
> > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-docs/2010-09/msg00119.php .
> > These are no indexed on the aggregate function page.
> >
> > While I was updating the functions section, I also alphabetised any
> > unsorted function tables.
> 
> I don't think my email reached the list, so reattaching a gzipped version.

Took a quick look now.  What I find weird is that in some hunks you
remove index entries from a table and place them in the surrounding
section, and in other places you insert new index entries inside tables.
I think the proper place for the index entries tends to be inside the
table.