Re: doc: Bring mention of unique index forced transaction wait behavior outside of the internal section

From: Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com>
To: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: doc: Bring mention of unique index forced transaction wait behavior outside of the internal section
Date: 2022-06-21 13:48:49
Message-ID: CAJ7c6TPDBaaHPgmj5bs89GofubKArbDBP+GnT=Gc4FO16q4-WQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi David,

> It's basically a glorified cross-reference. I didn't dislike directing the reader to the internals section enough to try and establish a better location for the main content.

One problem I see is that:

+ [..], but as there is no pre-existing data, visibility checks are unnecessary.

... allows a wide variety of interpretations, most of which will be
wrong. And all in all I find an added paragraph somewhat cryptic.

If the goal is to add a cross-reference I suggest keeping it short,
something like "For additional details on various corner cases please
see ...".

--
Best regards,
Aleksander Alekseev

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jakub Wartak 2022-06-21 13:59:20 RE: Use fadvise in wal replay
Previous Message Przemysław Sztoch 2022-06-21 13:41:48 Re: [PATCH] Completed unaccent dictionary with many missing characters