Ok addendu, it seems like the overview page for catalogs has exactly what I asked for in the contents page. Any reason they can't be merged? Is it just the nature of the doc system? As a postgres outsider, it seemed kinda obtuse.
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 10:37 PM Justin Dearing <zippy1...@gmail.com> wrote: > Switched jobs recently and returning to postgres after a long hiatus. The > docs are great, but I noticed a few things that could be improved in the > area of catalot documentations. > > > 1. The CREATE/ALTER/DROP doc pages should have a link to the > corresponding pg_catalog and INFORMATION_schema tables and views for that > object type. The > 2. pg_catalog docs should have a link to their corresponding > information_schema table or view and visa versa. > 3. Perhaps this page (and its analogs) > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.1/static/catalogs.html should have a > 1-3 word description of each catalog. Some are unintuitive. For example it > took awhile to figure out pg_attribute was the list of columns. > 4. OID columns should have a note saying something to the effect of > "to get the text name of this simply use atttypid::REGTYPE" > 5. I discovered that pg_catalog.name is a built in type today, but its > not listed as a built in type. I've yet to find it in the docs. It should > either be listed in the built in types, or the list of built in types > should link to the list of "other built in types" whereever they are. > > If any of those suggestions are ameanable where are the docs for > contributing to the docs? > > Regards, > > Justin Dearing >
