| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Another modest proposal for docs formatting: catalog descriptions |
| Date: | 2020-05-10 16:27:23 |
| Message-ID: | 14810.1589128043@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs pgsql-hackers |
Just FTR, here's a complete patch for this. I successfully regenerated
the column names, types, and ordering from the system catalogs, and
plugged the descriptions back into that by dint of parsing them out of
the XML. The "references" data was based on findoidjoins' results plus
hand additions to cover all the cases we are calling out now (there are
a lot of "references" links for attnums and a few other non-OID columns,
plus references links for views which findoidjoins doesn't consider).
So I have pretty high confidence that this info is OK. I'd be too
embarrassed to show anybody the code though ;-) ... it was just a brute
force hack.
regards, tom lane
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| catalog-reformat.patch.gz | application/x-gzip | 78.4 KB |
| website.patch | text/x-diff | 1.3 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jonathan S. Katz | 2020-05-10 18:03:32 | Re: Another modest proposal for docs formatting: catalog descriptions |
| Previous Message | postgresql_2016@163.com | 2020-05-10 01:01:05 | 【memory barrier】Should we update the README.barrier description. |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dmitry Dolgov | 2020-05-10 17:36:58 | Re: Index Skip Scan |
| Previous Message | Alexander Lakhin | 2020-05-10 16:00:00 | gcov coverage data not full with immediate stop |