Re: 9.5rc1 brin_summarize_new_values - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: 9.5rc1 brin_summarize_new_values
Date
Msg-id 20151228155000.GH58441@alvherre.pgsql
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: 9.5rc1 brin_summarize_new_values  (Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: 9.5rc1 brin_summarize_new_values  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Jeff Janes wrote:

> Another issue is:  it seems to have no SGML documentation.  Is that OK?

Here's a patch (which I had to write afresh, because I couldn't find
anything in my brin development tree.  Maybe I was just remembering
something I planned to do and never got around to.)

This creates a new sub-section at the bottom of "9.26 System
Administration Functions" named "Indexing Helper Functions", containing
a table with a single row which is for this function.  Also, in the BRIN
chapter it creates a subsection "62.1.1. Index Maintenance" which has
one paragraph mentioning that pages that aren't already summarized are
only processed by VACUUM or this function.

I thought about moving the last paragraph of the introduction (which
talks about pages_per_range) to the new subsection.  It's clearly of a
different spirit that the preceding paragraphs, but then that parameter
is not really "maintenance" of the index.  Perhaps I should name the
subsection something like "Operation and Maintenance" instead, and then
those two paragraphs fit in there.

Other opinions?


Regarding 9.26, this is its TOC:

9.26. System Administration Functions

    9.26.1. Configuration Settings Functions
    9.26.2. Server Signaling Functions
    9.26.3. Backup Control Functions
    9.26.4. Recovery Control Functions
    9.26.5. Snapshot Synchronization Functions
    9.26.6. Replication Functions
    9.26.7. Database Object Management Functions
    9.26.8. Generic File Access Functions
    9.26.9. Advisory Lock Functions
    9.26.10. Indexing Helper Functions

We can bikeshed whether the new subsection should be at the bottom, or
some other placement.  Maybe it should become 9.26.3, for example.

--
Álvaro Herrera                http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: pgbench stats per script & other stuff
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: 9.5rc1 brin_summarize_new_values