Minor improvement to fdwhandler.sgml

Started by Etsuro Fujitaabout 12 years ago5 messageshackers
Jump to latest
#1Etsuro Fujita
fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp

Hi all,

The patch attached improves docs in fdwhandler.sgml a little bit.

Thanks,

Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita

Attachments:

doc-fdw-planning.patchtext/plain; charset=Shift_JIS; name=doc-fdw-planning.patchDownload+3-3
#2Robert Haas
robertmhaas@gmail.com
In reply to: Etsuro Fujita (#1)
Re: Minor improvement to fdwhandler.sgml

On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 7:59 AM, Etsuro Fujita
<fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:

The patch attached improves docs in fdwhandler.sgml a little bit.

When you submit a patch, it's helpful to describe what the patch
actually does, rather than just saying it makes things better. For
example, I think that this patch could be described as "in
fdwhandler.sgml, mark references to scan_clauses with <structfield>
tags".

A problem with that idea is that scan_clauses is not a field in any struct.

--
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

#3Etsuro Fujita
fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp
In reply to: Robert Haas (#2)
Re: Minor improvement to fdwhandler.sgml

(2014/04/28 23:31), Robert Haas wrote:

On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 7:59 AM, Etsuro Fujita
<fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:

The patch attached improves docs in fdwhandler.sgml a little bit.

When you submit a patch, it's helpful to describe what the patch
actually does, rather than just saying it makes things better. For
example, I think that this patch could be described as "in
fdwhandler.sgml, mark references to scan_clauses with <structfield>
tags".

I thought so. Sorry, my explanation wasn't enough.

A problem with that idea is that scan_clauses is not a field in any struct.

I was mistaken. I think those should be marked with <literal> tags.
Patch attached.

Thanks,

Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita

Attachments:

doc-fdw-planning-2.patchtext/plain; charset=Shift_JIS; name=doc-fdw-planning-2.patchDownload+3-3
#4Robert Haas
robertmhaas@gmail.com
In reply to: Etsuro Fujita (#3)
Re: Minor improvement to fdwhandler.sgml

On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 4:10 AM, Etsuro Fujita
<fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:

(2014/04/28 23:31), Robert Haas wrote:

On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 7:59 AM, Etsuro Fujita
<fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:

The patch attached improves docs in fdwhandler.sgml a little bit.

When you submit a patch, it's helpful to describe what the patch
actually does, rather than just saying it makes things better. For
example, I think that this patch could be described as "in
fdwhandler.sgml, mark references to scan_clauses with <structfield>
tags".

I thought so. Sorry, my explanation wasn't enough.

A problem with that idea is that scan_clauses is not a field in any
struct.

I was mistaken. I think those should be marked with <literal> tags. Patch
attached.

OK, 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

#5Etsuro Fujita
fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp
In reply to: Robert Haas (#4)
Re: Minor improvement to fdwhandler.sgml

(2014/05/05 23:05), Robert Haas wrote:

On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 4:10 AM, Etsuro Fujita
<fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:

(2014/04/28 23:31), Robert Haas wrote:

On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 7:59 AM, Etsuro Fujita
<fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:

The patch attached improves docs in fdwhandler.sgml a little bit.

When you submit a patch, it's helpful to describe what the patch
actually does, rather than just saying it makes things better. For
example, I think that this patch could be described as "in
fdwhandler.sgml, mark references to scan_clauses with <structfield>
tags".

I thought so. Sorry, my explanation wasn't enough.

A problem with that idea is that scan_clauses is not a field in any
struct.

I was mistaken. I think those should be marked with <literal> tags. Patch
attached.

OK, committed.

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