Typo in description of PROGRAM parameter for the COPY command
The following documentation comment has been logged on the website: Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/14/sql-copy.html Description: On this page https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/sql-copy.html the description of the PROGRAM parameter for the COPY command has the following sentence with a minor typo: > ...so if you need to pass any arguments to shell command that come from an untrusted source... The "to shell command that come" part should be changed so it either reads like this: > ...so if you need to pass any arguments to a shell command that comes from an untrusted source... ...or it reads like this: > ...so if you need to pass any arguments to shell commands that come from an untrusted source... Many thanks, Eric Mutta.
Re: relpages in pg_class
Page and block can be used interchangeably, but the description of relpages in the documentation can be confusing to someone who doesn't care much about the difference between page and block. When I want to count pages from a table, maybe the keywords I should look for should be "the number of", but the relpages is described by document with "Size of". --- Shangzi Xie On Sat, Aug 20, 2022 at 3:16 AM Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 11:25:52AM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 9:40 AM Tom Lane wrote: > > > Yeah, we use "blocks" and "pages" interchangeably, which is something > > > I don't feel a need to change; but evidently the OP didn't realize > that. > > > This is a job for the glossary, perhaps? > > > > I think that they're synonyms that can often (but not always) be used > > interchangeably. I *think* that this understanding is shared by other > > people, though I should check. Here goes: > > > > To me, "block" emphasizes on-disk/relfilenode storage. Something that > > exists at a particular physical offset in a particular file (a > > BlockNumber + relfilenode). On the other hand, the term "page" > > emphasizes the in-memory format, and the indirection provided by the > > bufpage.c slotted page format (i.e. line pointer array indirection). > > Yes, I have heard the block-disk, page-memory explanation before. > > -- > Bruce Momjian > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__momjian.us&d=DwIBAg&c=009klHSCxuh5AI1vNQzSO0KGjl4nbi2Q0M1QLJX9BeE&r=Hul745xaxWgD5ax2VcStGxXAXxES8dE1okk4lpHMoao&m=iq1O1WJgFr-Q1WqUjSdWPoPWj7Ui7sDz3fQ5njhfrwdLVNKdZ-fCeSS0TFdJUe-y&s=o-_cOvuvBdiTSvBWdgCX5noK2cE5VZBF-jETQXEA-WE&e= > > EDB > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__enterprisedb.com&d=DwIBAg&c=009klHSCxuh5AI1vNQzSO0KGjl4nbi2Q0M1QLJX9BeE&r=Hul745xaxWgD5ax2VcStGxXAXxES8dE1okk4lpHMoao&m=iq1O1WJgFr-Q1WqUjSdWPoPWj7Ui7sDz3fQ5njhfrwdLVNKdZ-fCeSS0TFdJUe-y&s=e2Z4mi_VN2ktgB7rh3Y7N4KhPdeTi-4knCQ7yirZK1E&e= > > > Indecision is a decision. Inaction is an action. Mark Batterson > >
Re: Typo in description of PROGRAM parameter for the COPY command
> On 21 Aug 2022, at 03:31, PG Doc comments form wrote: >> ...so if you need to pass any arguments to shell command that come > from an untrusted source... > > The "to shell command that come" part should be changed so it either reads > like this: > >> ...so if you need to pass any arguments to a shell command that comes > from an untrusted source... > > ...or it reads like this: > >> ...so if you need to pass any arguments to shell commands that come > from an untrusted source... Not being a native english speaker, but since we're already referring to "the command" in the sentence it seems more natural to me to change to "the shell command". -- Daniel Gustafsson https://vmware.com/
Re: Typo in description of PROGRAM parameter for the COPY command
Daniel Gustafsson writes: > On 21 Aug 2022, at 03:31, PG Doc comments form wrote: >> ...so if you need to pass any arguments to shell command that come >> from an untrusted source... >> >> The "to shell command that come" part should be changed so it either reads >> like this: >> >> ...so if you need to pass any arguments to a shell command that comes >> from an untrusted source... >> >> ...or it reads like this: >> >> ...so if you need to pass any arguments to shell commands that come >> from an untrusted source... > Not being a native english speaker, but since we're already referring to "the > command" in the sentence it seems more natural to me to change to "the shell > command". Hmm ... to me the main problem with this fragment is that it's not entirely clear whether we're speaking of untrusted arguments or an untrusted shell command, ie which one is the antecedent of "that". The proposed variants seem to make that worse not better. I suggest rephrasing like ... so if you need to include any shell command arguments that come from an untrusted source, you must ... Or maybe even better, just drop "shell command" from that phrase altogether. Probably also s/passing/including/ in the next sentence. regards, tom lane
Re: Typo in description of PROGRAM parameter for the COPY command
> On 21 Aug 2022, at 20:48, Tom Lane wrote: > > Daniel Gustafsson writes: >> On 21 Aug 2022, at 03:31, PG Doc comments form >> wrote: >>> ...so if you need to pass any arguments to shell command that come >>> from an untrusted source... >>> >>> The "to shell command that come" part should be changed so it either reads >>> like this: >>> >>> ...so if you need to pass any arguments to a shell command that comes >>> from an untrusted source... >>> >>> ...or it reads like this: >>> >>> ...so if you need to pass any arguments to shell commands that come >>> from an untrusted source... > >> Not being a native english speaker, but since we're already referring to "the >> command" in the sentence it seems more natural to me to change to "the shell >> command". > > Hmm ... to me the main problem with this fragment is that it's not > entirely clear whether we're speaking of untrusted arguments or an > untrusted shell command, ie which one is the antecedent of "that". > The proposed variants seem to make that worse not better. I suggest > rephrasing like > > ... so if you need to include any shell command arguments that come from > an untrusted source, you must ... > > Or maybe even better, just drop "shell command" from that phrase > altogether. > > Probably also s/passing/including/ in the next sentence. Agreed, those suggestions make it better. Skimming the page I noticed that we wrap CSV in in all but a few places, which seemed randomly "chosen". Another sentence which stood out to me was this one on FREEZE: "This violates the normal rules of MVCC visibility and users specifying should be aware of the potential problems this might cause." The use of "specifying" seems odd to me, removing it makes it read clearer IM-non-native-O. The attached includes all the above suggestions. -- Daniel Gustafsson https://vmware.com/ copy.diff Description: Binary data
Re: Typo in description of PROGRAM parameter for the COPY command
Daniel Gustafsson writes: > Skimming the page I noticed that we wrap CSV in in all but a few > places, which seemed randomly "chosen". Another sentence which stood out to > me > was this one on FREEZE: > "This violates the normal rules of MVCC visibility and users specifying > should be aware of the potential problems this might cause." > The use of "specifying" seems odd to me, removing it makes it read clearer > IM-non-native-O. I suppose the author was aiming at "specifying it", but I agree that just dropping "specifying" works fine with fewer words. > The attached includes all the above suggestions. LGTM. regards, tom lane
Should 'sum(mvf)' read 'sum(mcv)'...?
The following documentation comment has been logged on the website: Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/14/row-estimation-examples.html Description: About halfway down this page https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/row-estimation-examples.html we see the following formula for calculating selectivity: > selectivity = (1 - sum(mvf))/(num_distinct - num_mcv) And just below the formula we see the explanatory sentence saying: > That is, add up all the frequencies for the MCVs and subtract them from one, ... It appears the above sentence is referring to the "(1 - sum(mvf))" portion of the formula, however I am not sure what "mvf" is referring to there...shouldn't it be "(1 - sum(mcv))" in order to match what the explanatory sentence is saying? Many thanks, Eric Mutta.
