Re: Confused comment about drop replica identity index

On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 03:46:13AM +0000, wangw(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com wrote:
> Here is a patch to correct wrong comment about
> REPLICA_IDENTITY_INDEX, And improve the pg-doc.

That's mostly fine. I have made some adjustments as per the
attached.

+ The default for non-system tables. Records the old values of the columns
+ of the primary key, if any. The default for non-system tables.
The same sentence is repeated twice.

+ Records no information about the old row.(This is the
default for system tables.)
For consistency with the rest, this could drop the parenthesis for the
second sentence.

+ <term><literal>USING INDEX index_name</literal></term>
This should use <replaceable> as markup for index_name.

Pondering more about this thread, I don't think we should change the
existing behavior in the back-branches, but I don't have any arguments
about doing such changes on HEAD to help the features being worked
on, either. So I'd like to apply and back-patch the attached, as a
first step, to fix the inconsistency.
--
Michael