On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 9:43 AM PG Doc comments form
wrote:
> The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
>
> Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/14/sql-savepoint.html
> Description:
>
> The "Compatibility" section deserves some code example to illustrate the
> behavior
Hello!
The new sample code looks clearer I agree!
Seb
From: David G. Johnston
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2022 4:41 PM
To: Sebastien Flaesch ; Pg Docs
Subject: Re: Missing example for SAVEPOINT using the same savepoint name
EXTERNAL: Do not click links or open att
The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/14/role-attributes.html
Description:
Issue #1:
"old" is a keyword, but I cannot query the old column explicitely with
surrounding quotes.
SELECT "old" FROM pg_roles;
Issue #2:
You do not hav
The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/14/textsearch-indexes.html
Description:
Hey,
when you google for "postgresql gist gin index" you will most probably see
this page (or an older version of it) as #1 and the only result from
p
PG Doc comments form writes:
> Issue #1:
> "old" is a keyword, but I cannot query the old column explicitely with
> surrounding quotes.
> SELECT "old" FROM pg_roles;
Look closer. That column is "oid" not "old".
> Issue #2:
> You do not have ALL role attributes documented on this page. Please a
On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 12:12 PM PG Doc comments form
wrote:
> Even more effective would be to update the page title and/or headline to
> make clear that it is about using GIN and GiST indexes in context of full
> text search only.
I agree that the overall structure is unclear, and seems to be mo
Peter Geoghegan writes:
> The page in question is "12.9. GIN and GiST Index Types", but it's
> really supplementary information for "12.2.2. Creating Indexes". The
> fact that the former has greater prominence than the latter (a general
> discussion of FTS indexing) seems like a problem in itself.
On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 12:49 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> I think we should take the index type names out of the section title
> entirely, and name it something generic like "Preferred Index Types for
> Full Text Search".
Agreed.
> After the recent changes discussed on the -www list, it's possible
> th
Peter Geoghegan writes:
> On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 12:49 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>> I think we should take the index type names out of the section title
>> entirely, and name it something generic like "Preferred Index Types for
>> Full Text Search".
> Agreed.
Proposed patch attached. The existing te
On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 1:28 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Proposed patch attached. The existing text already says "GIN indexes are
> the preferred text search index type", so I'm not sure we need to go
> further than that about guiding people which one to use. In particular,
> since GIN can't support in
On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 8:40 PM David G. Johnston
wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 11:05 AM Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
>>
>> > selectivity = (1 - null_frac1) * (1 - null_frac2) * min(1/
>> > num_distinct1,
>> > 1/num_distinct2)
>> > = (1 - 0) * (1 - 0) / max
Peter Geoghegan writes:
> On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 1:28 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>> Proposed patch attached. The existing text already says "GIN indexes are
>> the preferred text search index type", so I'm not sure we need to go
>> further than that about guiding people which one to use. In particular
12 matches
Mail list logo
