> On 13 Oct 2025, at 12:51, Oleg <o.sibiryakov@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
> - <command>COPY</command> and other functions which allow executing a
> + the <command>COPY</command> command and functions, which allow executing a
> I'm not sure about these, I think we use COPY without the the "the COPY
> command" decoration in many places so I think it's more consistent like this.
>
> I actually think we should add the decoration here because "<command>COPY</command> and other file-access functions"
> sounds a bit confusing since COPY is not a file-access function and we seem to put it in the list. Even though I
> agree that everybody knows COPY is a command, not a function.
We refer to SQL commands by just their names all over the documentation without
saying "an EXPLAIN command" etc, and I think this falls in that same category.
> - to call functions defined in the standard internal library, by using an
> + to call functions defined in the standard internal function library by using an
> interface similar to their SQL signature.
> Isn't it a bit redundant to say "internal function library" when we are already
> talking about function definitions?
>
> I agree that it may seem redundant, I added "function" here for the sake of consistency with lines 1829/1830 (if
appliedto the master branch)
> where the documentation mentions "standard internal function library".
I hadn't seen that, but with that in mind I agree that being consistent is good
so I'll withdraw that comment.
--
Daniel Gustafsson
