From: | John Naylor <john(dot)naylor(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Erik Rijkers <er(at)xs4all(dot)nl>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: fix typos |
Date: | 2022-08-18 02:11:55 |
Message-ID: | CAFBsxsHjqSwmQ9c+fpk10=gtSxxOpKY+eLtts3CU5pxt_KdqEw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 8:48 AM John Naylor
<john(dot)naylor(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2022 at 8:55 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> >
> > John Naylor <john(dot)naylor(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> > > This is really a straw-man proposal, since I'm not volunteering to do
> > > the work, or suggest anybody else should do the same. That being the
> > > case, it seems we should just go ahead with Justin's patch for
> > > consistency. Possibly we could also change the messages to say "ID"?
> >
> > I'd be content if we change the user-facing messages (and documentation
> > if any) to say "ID" not "OID".
>
> The documentation has both, so it makes sense to standardize on "ID".
> The messages all had oid/OID, which I changed in the attached. I think
> I got all the places.
>
> I'm thinking it's not wrong enough to confuse people, but consistency
> is good, so backpatch to v15 and no further. Does anyone want to make
> a case otherwise?
This is done.
--
John Naylor
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Justin Pryzby | 2022-08-18 02:36:26 | Re: shadow variables - pg15 edition |
Previous Message | David Rowley | 2022-08-18 01:32:14 | Re: POC: GROUP BY optimization |