On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 02:03, Greg Smith <g...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> On 01/15/2012 12:20 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> >>> Please follow the style already used for system catalogs; ie I think >>> there should be a summary table with one entry per view, and then a >>> separate description and table-of-columns for each view. >> >> >> Yes, that's a perfect precedent. I think the easiest path forward here is >> to tweak the updated pg_stat_activity documentation, since that's being >> refactoring first anyway. That can be reformatted until it looks just like >> the system catalog documentation. And then once that's done, the rest of >> them can be converted over to follow the same style. I'd be willing to work >> on doing that in a way that improves what is documented, too. The >> difficulty of working with the existing tables has been the deterrent for >> improving that section to me. > > I've applied a patch that does this now. Hopefully, I didn't create > too many spelling errors or such :-) > > I also applied a separate patch that folded the list of functions into > the list of views, since that's where they are called, as a way to > reduce duplicate documentation. I did it as a spearate patch to make > it easier to back out if people think that was a bad idea...
I think it's a little awkward this way; maybe it would be better as a separate table column. Or maybe it was better the way it was; I'm not sure. Or maybe we could have a separate table that just gives the equivalences between stats table-column pairs and functions. Of those ideas, I think I like "separate table in the same column" the best. Also, I wonder if we should promote section 27.2.2.1. Other Statistics Functions to 27.2.3. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers