On 3/15/16 3:42 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 12:31 AM, Amit Langote > <langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote: >> Ah, I see the nuance. Thanks for the explanation. Maybe, >> bt_index_check() and bt_index_parent_child_check() / >> bt_index_check_parent_child(). IMHO, the latter more clearly highlights >> the fact that parent/child relationships in the form of down-links are >> checked. > > Well, the downlink is in the parent, because there is no such thing as > an "uplink". So I prefer bt_index_parent_check(), since it usefully > hints at starting from the parent. It's also more concise. > >> By the way, one request (as a non-native speaker of English language, who >> ends up looking up quite a few words regularly) - >> >> Could we use "conform" or "correspond" instead of "comport" in the >> following error message: >> >> "left link/right link pair in index \"%s\" don't comport" > > OK. I'll do something about that.
It looks like an updated patch is expected here, though it seems that the only requests are for updates to comments. -- -David da...@pgmasters.net -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers