Thread: Typo in JIT documentation

Hi all,

I just found $subject:
     the server was compiled without <literal>--with-llvm</literal>),
-    <acronym>JIT</acronym> will not performed, even if considered to be
+    <acronym>JIT</acronym> will not be performed, even if considered to be
     beneficial based on the above criteria.  Setting <xref linkend="guc-jit"/>

Thanks,
--
Michael

On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 3:30 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 4:11 AM, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I just found $subject:
>>      the server was compiled without <literal>--with-llvm</literal>),
>> -    <acronym>JIT</acronym> will not performed, even if considered to be
>> +    <acronym>JIT</acronym> will not be performed, even if considered to
>> be
>>      beneficial based on the above criteria.  Setting <xref
>> linkend="guc-jit"/>
>
> Applied, thanks.

Hmm, I thought we talked about changing such references to say 'JIT
compilation' rather than just 'JIT'.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 02:50:51PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> Hmm, I thought we talked about changing such references to say 'JIT
> compilation' rather than just 'JIT'.

Perhaps.  I recall that this has been mentioned already the last couple
of weeks on the JIT thread.  Personally, I can see that JIT is listed as
an acronym in the docs with its meaning  explained by a link to
wikipedia about just-in-time compilation, so I am fine with the use of
the acronym.  "JIT" is actually used without the <acronym> markup in
config.sgml.  I think that at least this part should be fixed.

At the end that would be mainly Andres' call?  Do you think that an open
item would be adapted?
--
Michael