| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
| Cc: | PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Comments on columns in the pg_catalog tables/views |
| Date: | 2005-10-12 23:11:12 |
| Message-ID: | 5141.1129158672@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I wrote:
> David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> writes:
>> Before I dive into this, is there some reason why the pg_catalog.*
>> tables/views should not have comments that match the descriptions in
>> the docs? I can see where this could cause some maintenance issues,
> Yeah. If you can figure a way to auto-generate the comments from the
> sgml files, it'd be nice, but I definitely don't want to manually
> maintain Yet Another set of per-column information.
Dept of second thoughts: actually, perhaps see if you can generate the
pg_description entries from the C comments in the include/catalog header
files. There's already a strong motivation to hold those to
shorter-than-a-line length, whereas the column descriptions in
catalogs.sgml tend to run on a little longer, and wouldn't format nicely
in \dt+.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2005-10-12 23:23:46 | Re: Are cost estimates based on asserts? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-10-12 23:06:01 | Re: How TODO prevent PQfnumber() from lowercasing? |