> On 31 Mar 2023, at 14:35, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Daniel Gustafsson writes:
>> Reading this section I agree that the mix of ok/danger in the same example
>> can
>> be tad misleading though. Something like the attached is what I would prefer
>> as a reader.
>
> I think in your rewrite, "this que
Daniel Gustafsson writes:
> Reading this section I agree that the mix of ok/danger in the same example can
> be tad misleading though. Something like the attached is what I would prefer
> as a reader.
I think in your rewrite, "this query" is dangling a bit because there's
several sentences more
> On 28 Mar 2023, at 22:45, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> PG Doc comments form writes:
>> Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/15/explicit-locking.html
>
>> After the code snippet in the 6th paragraph of 13.3.5. Advisory Locks
>> (https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/explicit-locking.html#ADVISORY-LO
PG Doc comments form writes:
> Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/15/explicit-locking.html
> After the code snippet in the 6th paragraph of 13.3.5. Advisory Locks
> (https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/explicit-locking.html#ADVISORY-LOCKS)
> I believe there is a mistake in this sentence (I
The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/15/explicit-locking.html
Description:
After the code snippet in the 6th paragraph of 13.3.5. Advisory Locks
(https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/explicit-locking.html#ADVISORY-LOCKS)
I be
