On 2024-Feb-07, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> On 30 Jan 2024, at 15:44, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> > I propose to turn the list into a
> >
> > which looks _much_ nicer to read, as in the attached screenshot of
> > the PDF.
>
> +1, this reads a lot better.
Thanks, applied and backpatched to 16.
-
> On 30 Jan 2024, at 15:44, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I propose to turn the list into a
>
> which looks _much_ nicer to read, as in the attached screenshot of the
> PDF.
+1, this reads a lot better.
--
Daniel Gustafsson
> On 30 Jan 2024, at 15:36, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Alvaro Herrera writes:
>> I noticed while answering a question that commit b577743000cd added the
>> GUC scram_iterations and marked it GUC_REPORT, but failed to add it to
>> the PQparameterStatus documentation.
>
> Why is it GUC_REPORT at all? I
On 2024-Jan-30, Jelte Fennema-Nio wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 at 13:37, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >
> > I noticed while answering a question that commit b577743000cd added the
> > GUC scram_iterations and marked it GUC_REPORT, but failed to add it to
> > the PQparameterStatus documentation.
>
> +
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> I noticed while answering a question that commit b577743000cd added the
> GUC scram_iterations and marked it GUC_REPORT, but failed to add it to
> the PQparameterStatus documentation.
Why is it GUC_REPORT at all? I don't see a strong need for that.
(In particular, the re
On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 at 13:37, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> I noticed while answering a question that commit b577743000cd added the
> GUC scram_iterations and marked it GUC_REPORT, but failed to add it to
> the PQparameterStatus documentation.
+1 the improvements your suggesting (although 3 I don't k
> On 30 Jan 2024, at 13:36, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> I noticed while answering a question that commit b577743000cd added the
> GUC scram_iterations and marked it GUC_REPORT, but failed to add it to
> the PQparameterStatus documentation.
Ugh, thanks for fixing!
> 1. that list looks to be in ran
