On Mon, Jun 14, 2021 at 4:14 PM Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 14, 2021 at 3:50 PM Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote:
> > On 6/13/21 5:18 PM, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> >
> > >> "Expands an array into a set of rows. The array's elements are read out
> > >> in storage order."
> > >>
> > >> If we tweaked the multirange "unnest" function, we could change it to:
> > >>
> > >> + <para>
> > >> + Expands a multirange into a set of rows.
> > >> + The ranges are read out in storage order (ascending).
> > >> + </para>
> > >>
> > >> to match what the array "unnest" function docs, or
> > >>
> > >> + <para>
> > >> + Expands a multirange into a set of rows that each
> > >> + contain an individual range.
> > >> + The ranges are read out in storage order (ascending).
> > >> + </para>
> > >>
> > >> to be a bit more specific. However, I think this is also bordering on
> > >> overengineering the text, given there has been a lack of feedback on the
> > >> "unnest" array function description being confusing.
> > >
> > > I think it's not necessarily to say about rows here. Our
> > > documentation already has already a number of examples, where we
> > > describe set of returned values without speaking about rows including:
> > > json_array_elements, json_array_elements_text, json_object_keys,
> > > pg_listening_channels, pg_tablespace_databases...
> >
> > I do agree -- my main point was that I don't think we need to change
> > anything. I proposed alternatives just to show some other ways of
> > looking at it. But as I mentioned, at this point I think it's
> > overengineering the text.
> >
> > If folks are good with the method + code, I think this is ready.
>
> Cool, thank you for the summary. I'll wait for two days since I've
> published the last revision of the patch [1] (comes tomorrow), and
> push it if no new issues arise.
Pushed! Thanks to thread participants for raising this topic and
review. I'll be around to resolve issues if any.
------
Regards,
Alexander Korotkov
