Typo in JIT documentation

On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 4:11 AM, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
wrote:

Hi all,

I just found $subject:
the server was compiled without <literal>--with-llvm</literal>),
-    <acronym>JIT</acronym> will not performed, even if considered to be
+    <acronym>JIT</acronym> will not be performed, even if considered to be
beneficial based on the above criteria.  Setting <xref
linkend="guc-jit"/>

Applied, thanks.

--
Magnus Hagander
Me: https://www.hagander.net/ <http://www.hagander.net/&gt;
Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/ <http://www.redpill-linpro.com/&gt;

On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 3:30 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:

On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 4:11 AM, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
wrote:

Hi all,

I just found $subject:
the server was compiled without <literal>--with-llvm</literal>),
-    <acronym>JIT</acronym> will not performed, even if considered to be
+    <acronym>JIT</acronym> will not be performed, even if considered to
be
beneficial based on the above criteria.  Setting <xref
linkend="guc-jit"/>

Applied, thanks.

Hmm, I thought we talked about changing such references to say 'JIT
compilation' rather than just 'JIT'.

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

On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 02:50:51PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:

Hmm, I thought we talked about changing such references to say 'JIT
compilation' rather than just 'JIT'.

Perhaps. I recall that this has been mentioned already the last couple
of weeks on the JIT thread. Personally, I can see that JIT is listed as
an acronym in the docs with its meaning explained by a link to
wikipedia about just-in-time compilation, so I am fine with the use of
the acronym. "JIT" is actually used without the <acronym> markup in
config.sgml. I think that at least this part should be fixed.

At the end that would be mainly Andres' call? Do you think that an open
item would be adapted?
--
Michael