public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Oleg <[email protected]>
To: Daniel Gustafsson <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Documentation improvement patch
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2025 13:51:52 +0300
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
Thank you for your feedback, Daniel.
My thoughts are below:
/- Change the definition of a replication slot. + Changes the definition
of a replication slot. Reading this page it seems we are mixing tense in
many places, some say "Change the" and "Read some" and elsewhere we use
"Drops the". Maybe a more holistic approach would be better for this
page to improve consistency? /I agree, let's add "s" in all cases for the sake of consistency.
/- Not enabled by default because it is resource intensive. + Not
enabled by default because it is resource-intensive. We use both
spellings in multiple places, shouldn't all be changed?/
Agreed, changing all instances to "resource-intensive".
/- <command>COPY</command> and other file-access functions. + the
<command>COPY</command> command and file-access functions. ... -
<command>COPY</command> and other file-access functions. + the
<command>COPY</command> command and file-access functions. ... -
<command>COPY</command> and other functions which allow executing a +
the <command>COPY</command> command and functions, which allow executing
a I'm not sure about these, I think we use COPY without the the "the
COPY command" decoration in many places so I think it's more consistent
like this. /I actually think we should add the decoration here because "<command>COPY</command> and other file-access functions"
sounds a bit confusing since COPY is not a file-access function and we seem to put it in the list. Even though I
agree that everybody knows COPY is a command, not a function.
/- to call functions defined in the standard internal library, by using
an + to call functions defined in the standard internal function library
by using an interface similar to their SQL signature. Isn't it a bit
redundant to say "internal function library" when we are already talking
about function definitions?/
I agree that it may seem redundant, I added "function" here for the sake of consistency with lines 1829/1830 (if applied to the master branch)
where the documentation mentions "standard internal*function* library".
Please, let me know what you think of the last two points for me to send the updated patch.
--
Oleg Sibiryakov
On 10.10.2025 10:15, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> On 10 Sep 2025, at 09:54, Oleg<[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Dear all,
>> I have prepared a patch containing some minor inconsistencies in the documentation. Please, take a look.
>> I will be looking forward to your feedback.
> Thanks for the patch, while most of these are obvious improvements I have a few
> comments on some:
>
>
> - Change the definition of a replication slot.
> + Changes the definition of a replication slot.
> Reading this page it seems we are mixing tense in many places, some say "Change
> the" and "Read some" and elsewhere we use "Drops the". Maybe a more holistic
> approach would be better for this page to improve consistency?
>
>
> - Not enabled by default because it is resource intensive.
> + Not enabled by default because it is resource-intensive.
> We use both spellings in multiple places, shouldn't all be changed?
>
>
> - <command>COPY</command> and other file-access functions.
> + the <command>COPY</command> command and file-access functions.
> ...
> - <command>COPY</command> and other file-access functions.
> + the <command>COPY</command> command and file-access functions.
> ...
> - <command>COPY</command> and other functions which allow executing a
> + the <command>COPY</command> command and functions, which allow executing a
> I'm not sure about these, I think we use COPY without the the "the COPY
> command" decoration in many places so I think it's more consistent like this.
>
>
> - to call functions defined in the standard internal library, by using an
> + to call functions defined in the standard internal function library by using an
> interface similar to their SQL signature.
> Isn't it a bit redundant to say "internal function library" when we are already
> talking about function definitions?
>
>> The patch shall be applied to the REL_18_STABLE branch.
> As you mentioned downthread, this is also for master. Our workflow is to
> always apply to master and backpatch from there.
>
> --
> Daniel Gustafsson
>
>
>
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: Documentation improvement patch
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox