Greetings, * James Coleman (jtc...@gmail.com) wrote: > I'm breaking out a few questions I'd posed on another thread about the > release timeline [1] into this new thread. > > I noticed on the PG13 release announcement that the link for > incremental sort goes to the GUC docs [2] because (as Jonathan Katz > confirmed in the linked thread) that page actually has helpful anchor > tags. > > But I'm wondering if instead/also it should point to the examples in > the EXPLAIN docs [3] which actually explain what incremental sort > does. In the initial patch discussion we ended up putting the > explanation there because there was a desire to keep the GUC > descriptions short.
I agree that it would be quite nice to have that. > But that raises a larger question: should the GUC page also link to > the EXPLAIN examples? There's not an obvious anchor tag on the page > (that I can tell) to use for such a link though...so that could get > into an ever larger question about adding those anchors. Yes, it'd be useful to have the GUCs cross-reference into the places in the docs that explain the things those GUCs control in more detail, which I agree means adding more anchors.. I wonder if we could do so in some way where we put in anchors that are basically "hey, this GUC impacts this feature" and automagically build the links ... > It seems to me that we don't have a particularly great place for > detail explanations in the docs of the algorithms/nodes/etc. we > use...unless the new glossary section in the docs could fill that > role? I agree that it's a bit unfortunate that we don't have that and would like to see that changed, though that would mean we'd have that much more documentation to maintain.. I'm not sure that's a bad thing but it's a trade-off we need to consider. Thanks, Stephen
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
