On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 8:42 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 08:17:06AM +0100, Vik Fearing wrote:
> > On 26/11/2018 08:03, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >> Are you sure that's right? To me the original wording of that sentence
> >> seems to convey the message properly, and the upda
Michael Paquier writes:
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 08:17:06AM +0100, Vik Fearing wrote:
>> On 26/11/2018 08:03, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>> Are you sure that's right? To me the original wording of that sentence
>>> seems to convey the message properly, and the update done does not?
>> Yeah, I just
On 26/11/2018 15:14, Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Paquier writes:
>> On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 08:17:06AM +0100, Vik Fearing wrote:
>>> On 26/11/2018 08:03, Magnus Hagander wrote:
Are you sure that's right? To me the original wording of that sentence
seems to convey the message properly, and
On 2018-11-26 15:14, Tom Lane wrote:
Michael Paquier writes:
On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 08:17:06AM +0100, Vik Fearing wrote:
On 26/11/2018 08:03, Magnus Hagander wrote:
Are you sure that's right? To me the original wording of that
sentence
seems to convey the message properly, and the update do
On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 12:28:27AM -0500, Anthony Greene wrote:
> Documentation for v10.5, second paragraph, third sentence.
>
> Currently reads: Assignments, loops, conditionals are similar.
>
> Should read: Assignments, loops, and conditionals are similar.
Agreed. Fix applied back through 9.4
I think "table rows themselves" makes sense. I came up with another alternative
as below, as long as it does not change the message, the sentence is trying to
convey.
"TOAST table, which is used for out-of-line storage of field values that are
too large to keep [or, be kept] within the original
On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 09:14:18AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> But I can see that a lot of people might not be familiar with that usage,
> so I've got no objections to rewriting it more clearly --- any
> suggestions?
It has been suggested upthread to use "in the table rows themselves",
which does not
On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 05:40:04PM +, PG Doc comments form wrote:
> The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
>
> Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/11/libpq-pgservice.html
> Description:
>
> The default location for a user level connection service file on Windows
On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 08:38:02AM +0200, Theo Kramer wrote:
> Section 26.2.1. Planning wording includes the following
>
> "In any case the hardware architecture must be the same — shipping from, say,
> a 32-bit to a 64-bit system will not work."
>
> would be more correct if it read as follows
