On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 8:46 AM David G. Johnston <david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 6:39 PM Peter Smith <smithpb2...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> I was also wondering (but have not yet done) if the content *outside* >> the tables should be reordered to match the table 28.1/28.2 order. >> >> Thoughts? >>
Thanks for the feedback/suggestions > > I would love to do away with the ToC listing of view names in 28.2 altogether. > OK, done. See patch 0006. To prevent all the views sections from participating in the ToC I simply changed them to <sect3> instead of <sect2>. I’m not 100% sure if this was a brilliant modification or a total hack, but it does do exactly what you wanted. > Also, make it so each view ends up being its own separate page. > I did not do this. AFAIK those views of chapter 54 get rendered to separate pages only because they are top-level <sect1>. So I do not know how to put all these stats views onto different pages without radically changing the document structure. Anyway – doing this would be incompatible with my <sect3> changes of patch 0006 (see above). > The name of the views in the table should then be the hyperlinks to those > pages. > OK done. See patch 0005. All the view names (in column one of the tables) are hyperlinked to the views the same way as Chapter 54 does. The tables are a lot cleaner now. A couple of inconsistent view ids were also corrected. > Basically the way Chapter 54.1 works. Though the interplay between the top > Chapter 54 and 54.1 is a bit repetitive. > > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/views.html > > I wonder whether having the table be structured but the ToC be purely > alphabetical would be considered a good idea... > > The tables need hyperlinks regardless. I wouldn't insist on changing the > ordering to match the table, especially with the hyperlinks, but I also > wouldn't reject it. Figuring out how to make them one-per-page would be time > better spent though. > PSA new patches. Now there are 6 of them. If some of the earlier patches are agreeable can those ones please be committed? (because I think this patch may be susceptible to needing a big rebase if anything in those tables changes). ------ Kind Regards, Peter Smith. Fujitsu Australia.
v6-0002-Re-order-Table-28.2-Collected-Statistics-Views.patch
Description: Binary data
v6-0003-Re-order-Table-28.12-Wait-Events-of-type-LWLock.patch
Description: Binary data
v6-0005-Cleanup-view-name-hyperlinks-for-Tables-28.1-and-.patch
Description: Binary data
v6-0004-Re-order-Table-28.35-Per-Backend-Statistics-Funct.patch
Description: Binary data
v6-0006-Remove-all-stats-views-from-the-ToC-of-28.2.patch
Description: Binary data
v6-0001-Re-order-sections-of-28.4.-Progress-Reporting.patch
Description: Binary data
