On Thu, Dec 1, 2022 at 4:21 PM Laurenz Albe <laurenz.a...@cybertec.at> wrote:
> On Tue, 2022-11-29 at 16:26 -0500, Kirk Wolak wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 12:45 AM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > > Laurenz Albe <laurenz.a...@cybertec.at> writes: > > > > Now I think that is taking it too far. Your code sample would be > great > > > > for a tutorial, but it is too elaborate for the technical > documentation. > > > > The example should focus on the sequence functions, but more than > half > > > > of the code describes other parts of PostgreSQL: > > > > > > Yeah, that stuff seems quite out of place here. > > > > > > > I am alright with having a CREATE TABLE with a DEFAULT and an INSERT > or two; > > > > whatever it takes to show the functions in a realistic scenario. > > > > For example, you could INSERT a row that overrides the DEFAULT, then > call > > > > "setval()" to readjust the sequence. > > > > > > I don't believe we have such detail around very many, if indeed any, > > > of our other functions' documentation. > > > > > > regards, tom lane > > > > > > All changes specified have been addressed. > > The Example is significantly reduced, but readable. > > The extra "SELECT "'s have been removed off of the inline examples, > excluding the existing paragraph. > > > > This is the smallest possible change, that still has an example. > > > > The "Example" is not <title> as every attempt to make it such fails the > LINT process. > > You can have <title> only after the start of a section. > > The new examples in the table don't really add anything to the function > declaration... > > I realized that there already are some examples in the CREATE SEQUENCE > documentation, > so what about linking there instead of writing more examples? > > The attached patch does that and removes the less useful examples. What > do you think? > > Yours, > Laurenz Albe > +1
