Re: [PATCH] Tracking statements entry timestamp in pg_stat_statements - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrei Zubkov
Subject Re: [PATCH] Tracking statements entry timestamp in pg_stat_statements
Date
Msg-id 552e16d51f02fd4f29ae58bb24888e38f6e193c5.camel@moonset.ru
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCH] Tracking statements entry timestamp in pg_stat_statements  (Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [PATCH] Tracking statements entry timestamp in pg_stat_statements  (Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Julien,

On Sun, 2022-04-03 at 17:56 +0800, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> Just another minor nitpicking after a quick look:
> 
> + This field will be zero if ...
> [...]
> + this field will contain zero until this statement ...
> 
> The wording should be consistent, so either "will be zero" or "will
> contain
> zero" everywhere.  I'm personally fine with any, but maybe a native
> English
> will think one is better.
Agreed.

Searching the docs I've fond out that "will contain" usually used with
the description of contained structure rather then a simple value. So
I'll use a "will be zero" in the next version after your review.
--
regards, Andrei




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Julien Rouhaud
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Tracking statements entry timestamp in pg_stat_statements
Next
From: Etsuro Fujita
Date:
Subject: Re: Defer selection of asynchronous subplans until the executor initialization stage