Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 8:25 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Attached are screenshots of the same segment of table 9.10 as before
>> and of the initial portion of 9.30, the patch against HEAD to produce
>> these, and a hacky patch on the website's main.css to get it to go
>> along. Without the last you just get all the subsidiary stuff
>> left-justified if you build with STYLE=website, which isn't impossibly
>> unreadable but it's not the desired presentation.
> These seem very nice, and way more readable than the version with
> which you started the thread.
Glad you like 'em ;-). Do you have an opinion about what to do
with the operator tables --- ie do we need a column with the operator
name at the left?
regards, tom lane
