From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: e.rogov@postgrespro.ru
cc: pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Subject: Re: Opclass name
In-reply-to: <163490076530.680.16106931952823231354@wrigleys.postgresql.org>
References: <163490076530.680.16106931952823231354@wrigleys.postgresql.org>
Comments: In-reply-to PG Doc comments form <noreply@postgresql.org>
	message dated "Fri, 22 Oct 2021 11:06:05 -0000"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <3096397.1635001821.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2021 11:10:21 -0400
Message-ID: <3096398.1635001821@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/3096398.1635001821%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

PG Doc comments form <noreply@postgresql.org> writes:
> In commit 7a1cd526 (doc: Rework tables for built-in operator classes of
> index AMs) the name of the inet_ops opclass was changed to network_ops. It
> doesn't look right, because network_ops is the name of opfamily, not
> opclass.

Hm, yeah.  The table title says "opclass", and that's definitely the
name that would be more useful to most users, so we should list opclass
not opfamily names.  There are some other cases of opfname != opcname
in gist and brin, but those tables seem to give the opclass name in
each such case, so it's just this one mistake.

			regards, tom lane