Minor improvement to fdwhandler.sgml

Started by Etsuro Fujitaover 11 years ago5 messages

Etsuro Fujita

fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp

over 11 years ago

1 attachment(s)

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

diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/fdwhandler.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/fdwhandler.sgml
index 9c818cd..ffb38af 100644
--- a/doc/src/sgml/fdwhandler.sgml
+++ b/doc/src/sgml/fdwhandler.sgml
@@ -873,11 +873,11 @@ GetForeignServerByName(const char *name, bool missing_ok);
 
     <para>
      In <function>GetForeignPlan</>, generally the passed-in target list can
-     be copied into the plan node as-is.  The passed scan_clauses list
+     be copied into the plan node as-is.  The passed <structfield>scan_clauses</> list
      contains the same clauses as <literal>baserel-&gt;baserestrictinfo</>,
      but may be re-ordered for better execution efficiency.  In simple cases
      the FDW can just strip <structname>RestrictInfo</> nodes from the
-     scan_clauses list (using <function>extract_actual_clauses</>) and put
+     <structfield>scan_clauses</> list (using <function>extract_actual_clauses</>) and put
      all the clauses into the plan node's qual list, which means that all the
      clauses will be checked by the executor at run time.  More complex FDWs
      may be able to check some of the clauses internally, in which case those
@@ -895,7 +895,7 @@ GetForeignServerByName(const char *name, bool missing_ok);
      affect the cost estimate for the path.  The path's
      <structfield>fdw_private</> field would probably include a pointer to
      the identified clause's <structname>RestrictInfo</> node.  Then
-     <function>GetForeignPlan</> would remove that clause from scan_clauses,
+     <function>GetForeignPlan</> would remove that clause from <structfield>scan_clauses</>,
      but add the <replaceable>sub_expression</> to <structfield>fdw_exprs</>
      to ensure that it gets massaged into executable form.  It would probably
      also put control information into the plan node's

Robert Haas

robertmhaas@gmail.com

over 11 years ago

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

Etsuro Fujita

fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp

over 11 years ago

In reply to: Robert Haas (#2)

1 attachment(s)

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

diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/fdwhandler.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/fdwhandler.sgml
index 9c818cd..6b5c8b7 100644
--- a/doc/src/sgml/fdwhandler.sgml
+++ b/doc/src/sgml/fdwhandler.sgml
@@ -873,11 +873,11 @@ GetForeignServerByName(const char *name, bool missing_ok);
 
     <para>
      In <function>GetForeignPlan</>, generally the passed-in target list can
-     be copied into the plan node as-is.  The passed scan_clauses list
+     be copied into the plan node as-is.  The passed <literal>scan_clauses</> list
      contains the same clauses as <literal>baserel-&gt;baserestrictinfo</>,
      but may be re-ordered for better execution efficiency.  In simple cases
      the FDW can just strip <structname>RestrictInfo</> nodes from the
-     scan_clauses list (using <function>extract_actual_clauses</>) and put
+     <literal>scan_clauses</> list (using <function>extract_actual_clauses</>) and put
      all the clauses into the plan node's qual list, which means that all the
      clauses will be checked by the executor at run time.  More complex FDWs
      may be able to check some of the clauses internally, in which case those
@@ -895,7 +895,7 @@ GetForeignServerByName(const char *name, bool missing_ok);
      affect the cost estimate for the path.  The path's
      <structfield>fdw_private</> field would probably include a pointer to
      the identified clause's <structname>RestrictInfo</> node.  Then
-     <function>GetForeignPlan</> would remove that clause from scan_clauses,
+     <function>GetForeignPlan</> would remove that clause from <literal>scan_clauses</>,
      but add the <replaceable>sub_expression</> to <structfield>fdw_exprs</>
      to ensure that it gets massaged into executable form.  It would probably
      also put control information into the plan node's

Robert Haas

robertmhaas@gmail.com

over 11 years ago

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

Etsuro Fujita

fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp

over 11 years ago

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