From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
---|---|
To: | Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Should we put command options in alphabetical order in the doc? |
Date: | 2023-04-19 23:46:11 |
Message-ID: | CAH2-WznV1AFFFjWwRRyYpVyRsirCE=X-ybMoYER_Lfn7KDyWAg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 2:33 PM Melanie Plageman
<melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> As for alphabetical ordering vs importance ordering: while I do think
> that if a user does not know what parameter they are looking for, an
> alphabetical ordering is unhelpful, I also think the primary issue with
> grouping them by "importance" is that it is difficult to maintain. Doing
> so requires a discussion of importance for every new option added.
Not really. It's a matter that requires some amount of individual
judgement, in some cases. It may require effort, but I think that
that's likely to be worth it.
I won't be the one that quibbles over every little thing.
> For VACUUM, I'd perhaps suggest the options in alphabetical order
> followed by table_name and then column_name and then putting the
> parameter argument types at the end alphabetically.
>
> Of course, we could decide VACUUM is special and group its options by
> importance because this is especially helpful for users. I think that
> there are other SQL commands whose options' importance is not
> particularly worth debating.
That's very likely true -- it may be that most individual commands
really wouldn't be any worse off if they just used a standard
alphabetical order. I agree that consistency can be a virtue. But it's
not the highest virtue. There will be a number of important
exceptions, which will have outsized impact. VACUUM, ANALYZE, maybe
CREATE INDEX. So if there is going to be a new standard, there should
also be significant wiggle-room. Kind of like with the guidelines for
rmgr desc authors discussion.
--
Peter Geoghegan
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Gilman | 2023-04-20 00:03:46 | Re: Note new NULLS NOT DISTINCT on unique index tutorial page |
Previous Message | Arne Roland | 2023-04-19 23:28:36 | Re: Add the ability to limit the amount of memory that can be allocated to backends. |