Re: doc: Bring mention of unique index forced transaction wait behavior outside of the internal section - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David G. Johnston
Subject Re: doc: Bring mention of unique index forced transaction wait behavior outside of the internal section
Date
Msg-id CAKFQuwYGy3rX=G+dVgbthhDRvsEzk9jR6Tj0QGV9C8ALvUAxOQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: doc: Bring mention of unique index forced transaction wait behavior outside of the internal section  (Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander@timescale.com>)
Responses Re: doc: Bring mention of unique index forced transaction wait behavior outside of the internal section
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 6:49 AM Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander@timescale.com> wrote:
Hi David,

> It's basically a glorified cross-reference.  I didn't dislike directing the reader to the internals section enough to try and establish a better location for the main content.

One problem I see is that:

+ [..], but as there is no pre-existing data, visibility checks are unnecessary.

... allows a wide variety of interpretations, most of which will be
wrong. And all in all I find an added paragraph somewhat cryptic.

Yeah, I'd probably have to say "but since no existing record is being modified, visibility checks are unnecessary".

Is there a specific mis-interpretation that first came to mind for you that I can consider specifically?

If the goal is to add a cross-reference I suggest keeping it short,
something like "For additional details on various corner cases please
see ...".


That does work, and I may end up there, but it feels unsatisfying to be so vague/general.

David J.

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "David G. Johnston"
Date:
Subject: Re: doc: array_length produces null instead of 0
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: fix crash with Python 3.11