On Fri, Apr 3, 2026 at 12:35 PM Andreas Karlsson <andreas@proxel.se> wrote:
On 4/3/26 9:27 PM, Andreas Karlsson wrote: > On 4/3/26 8:18 PM, David G. Johnston wrote: >> Per the discussion on -general [1] I propose that we stop using the >> generic label storage_parameter on the create table reference page and >> instead set up proper labels for table and index variants. > > Nice patch, I like these changes! But you forgot to mention that you > added the index storage parameters as in <indexterm>. Not sure if it is > worth sending a new version of the patch for but something probably > useful for the committer to knw.
Shouldn't also update ALTER INDEX and LATER TABLE to match?
I gave it a thought and decided there was no ambiguity to resolve on those pages.
I'm not opposed to it but figured I'd wait for a committer to show interest and ask the scope to be expanded to a full docs review instead of just addressing the immediate user-reported confusion. When I do expand the scope on my own it seems to scare them off.
