Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL" - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David Rowley
Subject Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL"
Date
Msg-id CAApHDvp3osQwQam+wNTp9BdhP+QfWO6aY6ZTixQQMfM-UArKCw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL"  (David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL"
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, 11 Apr 2023 at 17:43, David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 11 Jun 2021 at 13:44, David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Anyway, I'll set an alarm for this time next year so I can check on
> > how many inconsistencies have crept back in over the development
> > cycle.
>
> That alarm went off today.
>
> There seem to be only 3 "a SQL"s in the docs to change to "an SQL".
>
> This is a pretty old thread, so here's a link [1] to the discussion.
>
> [1] https://postgr.es/m/CAApHDvpML27UqFXnrYO1MJddsKVMQoiZisPvsAGhKE_tsKXquw@mail.gmail.com

Link to the old thread above.

There's just 1 instance of "a SQL" that crept into PG16 after
d866f0374.  This probably means I'd be better off doing this in June a
few weeks before branching...

Patch attached.

David

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Pavel Stehule
Date:
Subject: Re: CASE control block broken by a single line comment
Next
From: Thomas Munro
Date:
Subject: [MASSMAIL]Streaming relation data out of order