On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 11:01 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 1:01 PM Peter Smith <smithpb2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 12:46 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Sun, Aug 8, 2021 at 10:21 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Sat, Aug 7, 2021 at 4:33 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 6:31 PM Masahiko Sawada > > > > > <sawada.m...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > > > When reading the doc of ALTER SUBSCRIPTION I realized that 'refresh > > > > > > options' in the following paragraph is not tagged: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > Additionally, refresh options as described under REFRESH PUBLICATION > > > > > > may be specified, except in the case of DROP PUBLICATION. > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > > > When I read it for the first time, I got confused because we > > > > > > actually > > > > > > have the 'refresh' option and this description in the paragraph of > > > > > > the > > > > > > 'refresh' option. I think we can improve it by changing to > > > > > > '<replaceable>refresh_option</replaceable>'. Thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I see that one can get confused but how about changing it to > > > > > "Additionally, refresh options as described under <literal>REFRESH > > > > > PUBLICATION</literal> (<replaceable>refresh_option</replaceable>) may > > > > > be specified,.."? I think keeping "refresh options" in the text would > > > > > be good because there could be multiple such options. > > > > > > > > > > > > > I feel like it would be better to reword it in some way that avoids > > > > using parentheses because they look like part of the syntax instead of > > > > just part of the sentence. > > > > > > > > > > Fair enough, feel free to propose if you find something better or if > > > you think the current text in the docs is good. > > > > > > > Thank you for the comments! > > > IMO just the same as your suggestion but without the parens would be good. > > e.g. > > > > "Additionally, refresh options as described under <literal>REFRESH > > PUBLICATION</literal> <replaceable>refresh_option</replaceable> may be > > specified,.." > > But "REFRESH PUBLICATION refresh_option" seems wrong in terms of SQL > syntax, not? >
Because the sentence says "... as described under ..." I thought it was clear enough it was referring to the documentation below and not the SQL syntax. > Given there could be multiple options how about using > "<replaceable>refresh_options</replaceable>"? That is, the sentence > will be: > > Additionally, <replaceable>refresh_options</replaceable> as described > under <literal>REFRESH PUBLICATION</literal> may be specified, > except in the case of <literal>DROP PUBLICATION</literal>. > +1 LGTM ------ Kind Regards, Peter Smith. Fujitsu Australia.
