On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 3:28 AM, Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 1:03 AM, Daniel Farina <dan...@heroku.com> wrote: > > I had a report from a user asking how they could VACUUM in the future > > under 9.3, when it's no longer supported (which took me aback). He > > referred me to a manual page: > > > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/sql-vacuum.html > > > > I realized, then, that the problem is the wordsmithing of: > > > > "This page in other versions: 9.2 / 9.1 / 9.0 / 8.4 | Unsupported > > versions: 9.3 / 8.3 / 8.2 / 8.1 / 8.0 / 7.4 / 7.3 / 7.2 / 7.1 / devel" > > > > An entirely reasonable person would decide that the VACUUM command is > > unsupported in any of the itemized versions. > > Strictly speaking, *everything in 9.3 is unsupported. Because it > hasn't been released yet. > > But I can understand the confusion - do you have a suggestion for how > to write it to make it more obvious what the actual problem is?
I don't think I communicated the problem right. Or maybe I did, but I can't tell from the response. So, forgive me for hashing it again in another way. The problem is the thinking process goes like this: I'm sitting on a page about VACUUM, and here's a bit of text itemizing what versions VACUUM exists in. But here's a bit of text saying that VACUUM isn't supported (read to mean: non-existent) in [7.1,8.3] + 9.3. The thing the user was being led to believe was that VACUUM was undergoing deprecation. In other words, he chose to tighter-bind the supported/unsupported to the topic of the page, rather than the status of the entire release. -- Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list (pgsql-docs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs
