Minor improvements in alter_table.sgml

On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 5:05 AM, Etsuro Fujita
<fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:

Attached is a patch to improve the manual page for the ALTER TABLE command.

Do we really need to add a section for "type_name" when we already
have a section for "OF type_name"?

constraint_name is also used for adding a constraint using an index.
So it could not only be a constraint to alter, validate, or drop, but
also a new constraint name to be added. Honestly, how much value is
there in even having a section for this? Do we really want to
document constraint_name as "name of an existing constraint, or the
name of a new constraint to be added"? It would be accurate, then,
but it also doesn't really tell you anything you didn't know already.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

(2014/04/09 1:23), Robert Haas wrote:

On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 5:05 AM, Etsuro Fujita
<fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:

Attached is a patch to improve the manual page for the ALTER TABLE command.

Do we really need to add a section for "type_name" when we already
have a section for "OF type_name"?

I think that the section for "type_name" would be necessary as that in
chapter "Parameters", not in chapter "Description", which includes the
section for "OF type_name".

constraint_name is also used for adding a constraint using an index.
So it could not only be a constraint to alter, validate, or drop, but
also a new constraint name to be added.

I overlooked that.

Honestly, how much value is
there in even having a section for this? Do we really want to
document constraint_name as "name of an existing constraint, or the
name of a new constraint to be added"? It would be accurate, then,
but it also doesn't really tell you anything you didn't know already.

You have a point there, but I feel odd about the documentation as is,
because some are well written (eg, column_name) and some are not (eg,
constraint_name). So, if there are no objections, I'd like to update
the patch.

Thanks,

Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

(2014/04/09 12:03), Etsuro Fujita wrote:

(2014/04/09 1:23), Robert Haas wrote:

On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 5:05 AM, Etsuro Fujita
<fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:

Attached is a patch to improve the manual page for the ALTER TABLE
command.

Do we really need to add a section for "type_name" when we already
have a section for "OF type_name"?

I think that the section for "type_name" would be necessary as that in
chapter "Parameters", not in chapter "Description", which includes the
section for "OF type_name".

constraint_name is also used for adding a constraint using an index.
So it could not only be a constraint to alter, validate, or drop, but
also a new constraint name to be added.

I overlooked that.

Honestly, how much value is
there in even having a section for this? Do we really want to
document constraint_name as "name of an existing constraint, or the
name of a new constraint to be added"? It would be accurate, then,
but it also doesn't really tell you anything you didn't know already.

You have a point there, but I feel odd about the documentation as is,
because some are well written (eg, column_name) and some are not (eg,
constraint_name). So, if there are no objections, I'd like to update
the patch.

Attached is an updated version of the patch.

Thanks,

Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita

On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 5:00 AM, Etsuro Fujita
<fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:

Attached is an updated version of the patch.

I applied the first two hunks of this, which seem like clear
oversights; and also the bit fixing the constraint_name language.

I think the other changes deserve to be considered separately, and in
particular I'm still not sure it's a good idea to document both OF
type_name and type_name.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

(2014/04/14 23:53), Robert Haas wrote:

On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 5:00 AM, Etsuro Fujita
<fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:

Attached is an updated version of the patch.

I applied the first two hunks of this, which seem like clear
oversights; and also the bit fixing the constraint_name language.

I think the other changes deserve to be considered separately, and in
particular I'm still not sure it's a good idea to document both OF
type_name and type_name.

OK, Thanks!

Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

(2014/04/15 15:27), Etsuro Fujita wrote:

(2014/04/14 23:53), Robert Haas wrote:

On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 5:00 AM, Etsuro Fujita
<fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:

Attached is an updated version of the patch.

I think the other changes deserve to be considered separately, and in
particular I'm still not sure it's a good idea to document both OF
type_name and type_name.

I've agreed on that point, but I think apart from the others, the
trivial typo should be corrected. Patch attached
(doc-altertable-typo.patch).

I noticed the description of index_name should also be corrected,
because it is currently used not only in CLUSTER ON, but in ADD
table_constraint_using_index. (It will also be used in REPLICA IDENTITY
in 9.4.) Patch attached (doc-altertable-indexname.patch).

Thanks,

Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita

On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 3:46 AM, Etsuro Fujita
<fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:

(2014/04/15 15:27), Etsuro Fujita wrote:

(2014/04/14 23:53), Robert Haas wrote:

On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 5:00 AM, Etsuro Fujita
<fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:

Attached is an updated version of the patch.

I think the other changes deserve to be considered separately, and in
particular I'm still not sure it's a good idea to document both OF
type_name and type_name.

I've agreed on that point, but I think apart from the others, the trivial
typo should be corrected. Patch attached (doc-altertable-typo.patch).

I noticed the description of index_name should also be corrected, because it
is currently used not only in CLUSTER ON, but in ADD
table_constraint_using_index. (It will also be used in REPLICA IDENTITY in
9.4.) Patch attached (doc-altertable-indexname.patch).

Agreed. Committed.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers