Tom Lane wrote:
>
>
> Hmmm ... it strikes me that someone wanting this level of detail
> would be better advised to look into the source code.
I did wonder about about it being better placed in 'internals'
somewhere, but it seemed to follow on from the 'explain' and 'stats'
sections quite well.
>I certainly
> wouldn't want to promise that a chunk of documentation like this
> will stay up-to-date.
Yeah - that is a concern... no doco is better than wrong doco :-)
Mind you, ISTM that the same objection could be leveled at the 'stats'
section....
best wishes
Mark