On Wed, 4 Jul 2018 10:46:30 +0200
Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 02.07.18 10:38, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> >> On 29 Jun 2018, at 18:44, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> >
> >> +1 for shortening it as proposed by Peter. The existing arrangement
> >> made sense when it was first written, when there were only about three
> >> individual options IIRC. Now it's just confusing, especially since you
> >> can't tell very easily whether any of the individual options were
> >> intentionally omitted from the list. It will not get better with
> >> more options, either.
> >
> > Marking this "Waiting for Author” awaiting an update version expanding with the
> > above comment.
>
> I ended up rewriting that whole section a bit to give it more structure.
> I included all the points discussed in this thread.
Thank you for fixing this.
>
> --
> Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
> PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
>
--
Yugo Nagata <nagata@sraoss.co.jp>