From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
Cc: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Adding comments for system table/column names |
Date: | 2012-10-13 19:14:55 |
Message-ID: | CABUevEwt2FQ6=ruHRiZ=Jdqg8Rk6Uc7iLtgqA4DaADdPHKVkBw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 9:12 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 09:10:05PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> >> > I think the idea of having the short descriptions in SQL and longer ones
>> >> > in SGML is not maintainable. One idea would be to clip the SQL
>> >> > description to be no longer than a specified number of characters, with
>> >> > proper word break detection.
>> >>
>> >> I prefer overlong entries to machine-truncated ones. Seeing "Does the access
>> >> method support ordered" for both pg_am.amcanorder and pg_am.amcanorderbyop
>> >> thanks to the choice of truncation point does not seem like a win.
>> >>
>> >> We could store a short version in the SGML markup, solely for this process to
>> >> extract. In its absence, use the documentation-exposed text. The extractor
>> >> could emit a warning when it uses a string longer than N characters, serving
>> >> as a hint to add short-version markup for some column. If that's too hard,
>> >> though, I'd still prefer overlong entries to nothing or to truncated entries.
>> >
>> > I think the simplest solution would be to place SGML comment markers
>> > around text we want to extract from overly-long SGML descriptions.
>> > Descriptions without SGML comments would be extracted unchanged.
>>
>> Not sure how convenient that is, but it would certainly work. And it
>> would be a lot better than cutting off at word or character limits or
>> anything like that.
>
> Well, I figure we have to do something, because people would like those
> descriptions, and recording them in two places is too much overhead.
Agreed, this is definitely better than the other options there. And
the best suggetsion so far.
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Phil Sorber | 2012-10-13 19:28:01 | Re: getopt() and strdup() |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-10-13 19:14:09 | Re: getopt() and strdup() |