Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2020 12:28:23 -0400
From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: galiev_mr@taximaxim.ru, pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: INDEX with optional storage parameter value
Message-ID: <20200630162823.GD28710@momjian.us>
References: <159283163235.684.4482737698910467437@wrigleys.postgresql.org>
 <20200627211423.GG16644@momjian.us>
 <20200629071858.GC183079@paquier.xyz>
 <20200629135317.GA17529@momjian.us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200629135317.GA17529@momjian.us>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 09:53:17AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 04:18:58PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 05:14:23PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > I found a few more places that also didn't properly document this; 
> > > patch attached.
> > 
> > Good catch!  I am not seeing any missing spots, so this looks good to
> > me.  You are planning a backpatch, right?
> 
> Yes, backpatch.  I found the pattern of areas needing fixes to be quite
> odd.  ;-)

Patch applied through 9.5.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        https://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             https://enterprisedb.com

  The usefulness of a cup is in its emptiness, Bruce Lee