Re: clarify "rewritten" in pg_checksums docs - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: clarify "rewritten" in pg_checksums docs
Date
Msg-id 20200902082348.GD2129@paquier.xyz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: clarify "rewritten" in pg_checksums docs  (Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>)
Responses Re: clarify "rewritten" in pg_checksums docs  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Sep 01, 2020 at 03:44:06PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> Well, I was thinking less technically accurate and more descriptive for end
> users, hiding the implementation details.  "Rewrite" sounds to me more like
> changing data rather than amending pages with a checksum keeping data intact.
> Either way, adding "in-place" is an improvement IMO.

Using rewritten still sounds more adapted to me, as we still write the
thing with chunks of size BLCKSZ.  No objections with the addition of
"in-place" for that sentence.  Any extra opinions?
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Include access method in listTables output
Next
From: John Naylor
Date:
Subject: Re: factorial function/phase out postfix operators?