From: | Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> |
Cc: | Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Josef Šimánek <josef(dot)simanek(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Improvements and additions to COPY progress reporting |
Date: | 2021-03-04 16:45:50 |
Message-ID: | CAEze2Wh+VR-g1iQL+3y1GzGz2JoMNpoB-C+y5Aaft2wF9z1JFA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 4 Mar 2021 at 17:29, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 04, 2021 at 05:19:18PM +0100, Matthias van de Meent wrote:
> >
> > "Backends running [...] report progress to [...] instead" is,
> > a.f.a.i.k., correct English. Adding 'will' would indeed still be
> > correct, but it would in my opinion also be decremental to the
> > readability of the section due to the repeated use of the same
> > template sentence structure. I think that keeping it as-is is just
> > fine.
>
> I'd prefer to see the same thing repeated, since then it's easy to compare, for
> readers, and also future doc authors. That's normal in technical documentation
> to have redundancy. It's easy to read.
>
> I'd suggest to move "instead" into the middle of the sentence,
> and combine VACUUM+FULL, and add "their":
>
> > > + ... Backends running <command>VACUUM FULL</literal> will instead report
> > > + their progress in the <structname>pg_stat_progress_cluster</structname> view.
Sure, I'm convinced. PFA the patchset with this change applied.
With regards,
Matthias van de Meent
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v12-0003-Add-copy-progress-reporting-regression-tests.patch | text/x-patch | 5.1 KB |
v12-0002-Add-backlinks-to-progress-reporting-documentatio.patch | text/x-patch | 7.3 KB |
v12-0001-Add-progress-reported-components-for-COPY-progre.patch | text/x-patch | 12.3 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Justin Pryzby | 2021-03-04 16:47:58 | Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: Batch/pipelining support for libpq |
Previous Message | Ibrar Ahmed | 2021-03-04 16:41:52 | Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: Batch/pipelining support for libpq |