Thread: 11.7 Indexes on Expressions: editorial correction
The following documentation comment has been logged on the website: Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/12/indexes-expressional.html Description: The paragraph that begins "If we were to declare this index UNIQUE,..." refers to the index test1_lower_col1_idx, not to the test1_uniq_int index it currently follows. It would appear the latter example was spliced into the middle of discussing the former. The paragraphs should be ordered: CREATE INDEX test1_lower_col1_idx .... If we were to declare this index UNIQUE, ... Expression indexes also allow control.... CREATE UNIQUE INDEX test1_uniq_int ...
PG Doc comments form <noreply@postgresql.org> writes: > The paragraph that begins "If we were to declare this index UNIQUE,..." > refers to the index test1_lower_col1_idx, not to the test1_uniq_int index it > currently follows. It would appear the latter example was spliced into the > middle of discussing the former. Yes, this was complained of before: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/E1ikvbp-0005jW-E9%40gemulon.postgresql.org I remain of the opinion that we'd be best off to just revert a9760d0f3 altogether. Bruce's last proposal mostly did that, but it still insisted on muddying an existing example with an unrelated comment. regards, tom lane
On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 10:32:01AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > PG Doc comments form <noreply@postgresql.org> writes: > > The paragraph that begins "If we were to declare this index UNIQUE,..." > > refers to the index test1_lower_col1_idx, not to the test1_uniq_int index it > > currently follows. It would appear the latter example was spliced into the > > middle of discussing the former. > > Yes, this was complained of before: > > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/E1ikvbp-0005jW-E9%40gemulon.postgresql.org > > I remain of the opinion that we'd be best off to just revert > a9760d0f3 altogether. Bruce's last proposal mostly did that, > but it still insisted on muddying an existing example with an > unrelated comment. Muddy patch applied. ;-) I am open to clarifying it but I think we need something in our docs about this idea. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> https://momjian.us EnterpriseDB https://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription +