Thread: Doc patch, put pg_temp into the documentation's index
Hi,
2 patches:
pg_temp-toindex.patch
Puts pg_temp into the index of the docs.
(Line lengths are ugly so the change can
be easily reviewed.)
pg_temp-reformat.patch
Reformats the doc source after the
above patch. (Fixes line length.)
Regards,
Karl <kop@meme.com>
Free Software: "You don't pay back, you pay forward."
-- Robert A. Heinlein
Attachment
On Fri, 2012-09-28 at 11:10 -0500, Karl O. Pinc wrote: > pg_temp-toindex.patch > Puts pg_temp into the index of the docs. But there is no object called pg_temp. It always pg_temp_NNNN something. How should that be indexed?
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> On Fri, 2012-09-28 at 11:10 -0500, Karl O. Pinc wrote:
>> pg_temp-toindex.patch
>> Puts pg_temp into the index of the docs.
> But there is no object called pg_temp. It always pg_temp_NNNN
> something. How should that be indexed?
We do <replaceable>NNNN</> in a lot of places, and that seems
serviceable enough, at least in output formats where the NNNN can be
rendered differently from plain text. I don't remember though whether
the sgml index infrastructure allows markup in an index item.
regards, tom lane
On 11/17/2012 12:19:02 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On Fri, 2012-09-28 at 11:10 -0500, Karl O. Pinc wrote: > > pg_temp-toindex.patch > > Puts pg_temp into the index of the docs. > > But there is no object called pg_temp. It always pg_temp_NNNN > something. How should that be indexed? My thought is not to index the db object; it isn't particularly interesting to a user. Instead what's indexed is the token pg_temp, used when setting search_path. The utility of the token is explained in several places in the docs. Regards, Karl <kop@meme.com> Free Software: "You don't pay back, you pay forward." -- Robert A. Heinlein
On Sat, 2012-11-17 at 11:33 -0600, Karl O. Pinc wrote: > On 11/17/2012 12:19:02 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > On Fri, 2012-09-28 at 11:10 -0500, Karl O. Pinc wrote: > > > pg_temp-toindex.patch > > > Puts pg_temp into the index of the docs. > > > > But there is no object called pg_temp. It always pg_temp_NNNN > > something. How should that be indexed? > > My thought is not to index the db object; it isn't > particularly interesting to a user. Instead what's > indexed is the token pg_temp, used when > setting search_path. The utility of the token is > explained in several places in the docs. Actually, since this is the pg_temp alias for the search path, it is appropriate. So committed as is.
On 11/17/2012 05:10:12 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On Sat, 2012-11-17 at 11:33 -0600, Karl O. Pinc wrote: > > what's > > indexed is the token pg_temp, used when > > setting search_path. > Actually, since this is the pg_temp alias for the search path, it is > appropriate. So committed as is. Thanks for the work on this and the other patches you've helped me out with, and for the larger work on PG of course. I would feel like I was cluttering the channel if I sent a thanks each time but I do want to acknowledge both your help and the work the other Postgres people do. Regards, Karl <kop@meme.com> Free Software: "You don't pay back, you pay forward." -- Robert A. Heinlein