Re: Missing comma?

From: Marina Polyakova <m(dot)polyakova(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: daniel(at)yesql(dot)se, a(dot)lakhin(at)postgrespro(dot)ru, pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Missing comma?
Date: 2020-05-14 15:30:38
Message-ID: 226cae2ef0bf26a59011de38eec9c7f4@postgrespro.ru
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs

On 2020-05-14 03:07, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 05:17:43PM +0300, Marina Polyakova wrote:
>> in my opinion it's a little unclear what "or default" means at the
>> end,
>> because the comma is used to separate enumeration elements ("d =
>> default
>> <...>, n = nothing, f = all columns, i = index <...>") and inside the
>> element description ("i = index with indisreplident set, or default").
>> Therefore here is an additional patch from me to clarify this place,
>> thanks
>> to Alexander Lakhin for help.
>
> Yes, I agree that this last "or default" in the docs does not make
> much sense, because we always enforce REPLICA_IDENTITY_NOTHING if
> there is no replica identity.

This looks like a shortened version of a comment from
src/include/catalog/pg_class.h:

/*
* an explicitly chosen candidate key's columns are used as replica
identity.
* Note this will still be set if the index has been dropped; in that
case it
* has the same meaning as 'd'.
*/
#define REPLICA_IDENTITY_INDEX 'i'

>> diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/catalogs.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/catalogs.sgml
>> index
>> 02ddebae99d98110a8dd290dd4cb0c980adf7984..034a08f80ea4269f131e7e1383ba482fd76d9344
>> 100644
>> --- a/doc/src/sgml/catalogs.sgml
>> +++ b/doc/src/sgml/catalogs.sgml
>> @@ -1936,7 +1936,7 @@ SCRAM-SHA-256$<replaceable>&lt;iteration
>> count&gt;</replaceable>:<replaceable>&l
>> <literal>d</literal> = default (primary key, if any),
>> <literal>n</literal> = nothing,
>> <literal>f</literal> = all columns,
>> - <literal>i</literal> = index with
>> <structfield>indisreplident</structfield> set, or default
>> + <literal>i</literal> = index with
>> <structfield>indisreplident</structfield> set (if any)
>> </entry>
>> </row>
>
> And you don't need the ("if any") either here, no?
> REPLICA_IDENTITY_INDEX means that we have an index associated with the
> replica identity so it seems to me that this last part can just be
> removed.

I tried to save information for cases when the index is dropped as in
the code comment (see above) and the function RelationGetIndexList
(where IIUC we check if this index exists):

if (replident == REPLICA_IDENTITY_DEFAULT && OidIsValid(pkeyIndex))
relation->rd_replidindex = pkeyIndex;
else if (replident == REPLICA_IDENTITY_INDEX &&
OidIsValid(candidateIndex))
relation->rd_replidindex = candidateIndex;
else
relation->rd_replidindex = InvalidOid;

Perhaps it will be useful for some users to know that relreplident = i
does not mean that the required index exists (as in default case)?..

--
Marina Polyakova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-docs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2020-05-15 00:00:17 Re: Add A Glossary
Previous Message David G. Johnston 2020-05-14 14:40:12 Re: CHECK constraints - order of evaluation