Re: Naming of network_ops vs. inet_ops for SP-GIST - Mailing list pgsql-docs

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Naming of network_ops vs. inet_ops for SP-GIST
Date
Msg-id 2581959.1674617908@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Naming of network_ops vs. inet_ops for SP-GIST  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Responses Re: Naming of network_ops vs. inet_ops for SP-GIST  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
List pgsql-docs
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> writes:
> I don't have a strong opinion about the naming inconsistency between
> the opclass name and the opfamily name in this case, though, couldn't
> it create more problems than actually fix something?

Well, it's been like that from day one and people haven't complained.
I think changing it now would add more confusion than it subtracts.

> Anyway, attached is a patch for the docs.  Thoughts?

Works for me.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-docs by date:

Previous
From: "Martin L. Buchanan"
Date:
Subject: log_temp_files one minor clarification
Next
From: PG Doc comments form
Date:
Subject: Not an error but a difficult wording