Re: Clarification on the docs
От | Igor Korot |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Clarification on the docs |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+FnnTyyUV-QwkSYbXoXmmoc+ghhEsmeEvjQ1QH6uFZVzvwR9A@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Clarification on the docs ("David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Clarification on the docs
|
Список | pgsql-general |
Hi, David,
On Fri, Apr 11, 2025 at 9:04 PM David G. Johnston <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Apr 11, 2025 at 6:49 PM Igor Korot <ikorot01@gmail.com> wrote:Hi, ALL,
On the https://www.postgresql.org/docs/17/sql-createindex.html#SQL-CREATEINDEX-STORAGE-PARAMETERS
its said:
[quote]
The optional WITH clause specifies storage parameters for the index.
Each index method has its own set of allowed storage parameters. The
B-tree, hash, GiST and SP-GiST index methods all accept this
parameter:
[/quote]These are the index methods and the valid lists for each. The docs are correct in how they remove duplication. I'm undecided on whether that is the best presentation choice. I would at minimum place a new paragraph after "own set of allowed storage parameters." so that "The B-tree, hash..." begins its own line.B-tree:fillfactordeduplicate_itemsHash:fillfactorGist:fillfactorbufferingSP-Gist:fillfactorGIN:fastupdategin_pending_list_limitBRIN:pages_per_rangeautosummarize
This above looks much better. What stops you from pushing it?
There is no double meaning and everything is split nicely.
Thank you.
David J.
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: