From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Small documentation improvement for ALTER SUBSCRIPTION |
Date: | 2021-08-10 03:27:59 |
Message-ID: | CAA4eK1K1WM0pmF+sJbnqVt787c69mZuUfUcmjRk__iRkTp+WqA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 6:31 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 1:01 PM Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 12:46 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> But "REFRESH PUBLICATION refresh_option" seems wrong in terms of SQL
> syntax, not?
>
> Given there could be multiple options how about using
> "<replaceable>refresh_options</replaceable>"? That is, the sentence
> will be:
>
> Additionally, <replaceable>refresh_options</replaceable> as described
> under <literal>REFRESH PUBLICATION</literal> may be specified,
> except in the case of <literal>DROP PUBLICATION</literal>.
>
Normally (at least on this doc page), we use this tag for some defined
option, syntax and as refresh_options is none of them, it would look a
bit awkward.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2021-08-10 03:37:15 | Re: [bug] Logical Decoding of relation rewrite with toast does not reset toast_hash |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2021-08-10 03:24:13 | Re: alter table set TABLE ACCESS METHOD |