Re: Possible inaccurate description of wal_compression in docs - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Xuneng Zhou
Subject Re: Possible inaccurate description of wal_compression in docs
Date
Msg-id CABPTF7WAJCeXfH_hBJK=2ALnAJHuSwwHBWDpqbNzQWJtLGRi0w@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Possible inaccurate description of wal_compression in docs  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hi,

On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 12:41 PM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 06:59:55PM +0300, Andrey Borodin wrote:
> FPWs are used here and there in a lot of places, like "FPI for
> hint". And indexes are build using FPI for many years, it did not
> start with 17...
> This list is not exhaustive in any case, so I agree that formulation
> should not be very strict.

Perhaps, yes, the formulation used in this paragraph could be a bit
more evasive.  What we do not want is to keep a wording that would
require more maintenance each time the internals of the backend are
changed, so adding an extra "like" may be OK.

Do any of you have a specific wording in mind?


"Like" LGMT. 

Best,
Xuneng

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)"
Date:
Subject: RE: Conflict detection for update_deleted in logical replication
Next
From: vignesh C
Date:
Subject: Re: Add support for specifying tables in pg_createsubscriber.