Grammar suggestion
The following documentation comment has been logged on the website: Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/15/ddl-constraints.html Description: Dear postgres Team, I happened to have stumbled across a tricky to read sentence in Ch. 5.45 'Foreign Keys' (Postgres Version 15). The original sentence: "Normally, a referencing row need not satisfy the foreign key constraint if any of its referencing columns are null". Here's the revised version: "Normally, a referencing row does not need to satisfy the foreign key constraint if any of its referencing columns are null." A bit restructuring in beginning of this sentence can it make it grammatically complete and clear for the reader. Kindly yours, Sayed Dileri.
Re: Grammar suggestion
On Monday, January 8, 2024, PG Doc comments form wrote: > The following documentation comment has been logged on the website: > > Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/15/ddl-constraints.html > Description: > > Dear postgres Team, > > I happened to have stumbled across a tricky to read sentence in Ch. 5.45 > 'Foreign Keys' (Postgres Version 15). > > The original sentence: "Normally, a referencing row need not satisfy the > foreign key constraint if any of its referencing columns are null". > > Here's the revised version: "Normally, a referencing row does not need to > satisfy the foreign key constraint if any of its referencing columns are > null." > > A bit restructuring in beginning of this sentence can it make it > grammatically complete and clear for the reader. > I see where you are coming from but I think the word “need” is actual problem and it has to go. We use the phrase “escapes satisfying” in the subsequent sentence and should use it here too. Normally, a referencing row escapes satisfying the foreign key constraint if any of its referencing columns are null. [add: This is what is meant by match simple]. If match full is … Also, we go to the trouble of accepting “match partial”. Maybe add a final sentence in this paragraph nothing that we do so and explaining what partial is defined to mean in the standard? Also, we only note the not implemented in the syntax parameters area, not the compatibility area…this seems like an oversight. David J.
Re: Grammar suggestion
"David G. Johnston" writes: > I see where you are coming from but I think the word “need” is actual > problem and it has to go. We use the phrase “escapes satisfying” in the > subsequent sentence and should use it here too. Meh. I don't like the "escapes" construction too much; I think it's more confusing than "need not". But I agree that the two sentences should use parallel constructions. > Also, we go to the trouble of accepting “match partial”. Maybe add a final > sentence in this paragraph nothing that we do so and explaining what > partial is defined to mean in the standard? I'd be inclined not to. That info would fit in the reference page that covers this, but this is introductory material and shouldn't get too deep in the weeds. (Of course, if we ever did add MATCH PARTIAL, we'd have to explain it here. But nobody's done so in twenty years so I'm not holding my breath.) regards, tom lane
Re: initdb username doc bug
On Sat, Jan 6, 2024 at 11:27:14PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > "David G. Johnston" writes: > > Or just the bit more verbose “user running the initdb command” and don’t > > bother giving it a label, which is basically the approach used in the > > description for initdb anyway. > > Or if you want a few more words, "name of the operating-system user > running initdb". I don't like "installation user", that's just about > as vague as could be. Agreed, updated patch attached. -- Bruce Momjian https://momjian.us EDB https://enterprisedb.com Only you can decide what is important to you. diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/ref/initdb.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/ref/initdb.sgml index d43c91575c..cd75cae10e 100644 --- a/doc/src/sgml/ref/initdb.sgml +++ b/doc/src/sgml/ref/initdb.sgml @@ -417,10 +417,10 @@ PostgreSQL documentation --username=username -Selects the user name of the +Sets the user name of the bootstrap superuser. -This defaults to the name of the -cluster owner. +This defaults to the name of the operating-system user running +initdb.
Re: initdb username doc bug
On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 2:26 PM Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Sat, Jan 6, 2024 at 11:27:14PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > "David G. Johnston" writes: > > > Or just the bit more verbose “user running the initdb command” and > don’t > > > bother giving it a label, which is basically the approach used in the > > > description for initdb anyway. > > > > Or if you want a few more words, "name of the operating-system user > > running initdb". I don't like "installation user", that's just about > > as vague as could be. > > Agreed, updated patch attached. > > +1 Thanks! David J.
Re: initdb username doc bug
Bruce Momjian writes: > Agreed, updated patch attached. WFM. regards, tom lane
