Re: Pushing btree opclass implementor's docs to the main SGML docs

[Tom Lane]

Peter Eisentraut  writes:
> On 2/5/18 18:51, Tom Lane wrote:
>> So I can see two ways to approach this: add two new subsections at the end
>> of xindex.sgml, or create a new chapter about b-trees in Part VII
>> ("Internals") to go beside the existing ones about the more recently added
>> index types.  The latter would make more sense if anyone was inspired to
>> write something comparable in length to the existing per-index-type
>> chapters.  But I'm not volunteering to do that, so if it's a chapter it'd
>> be a mighty thin one to start with.

> xindex seems better to me.

Oh, I already did it as a chapter.  I'm inclined to think that somebody
will want to write something more there someday, and anyway it's already
longer than some existing chapters ...

regards, tom lane

Re: Pushing btree opclass implementor's docs to the main SGML docs

[Peter Eisentraut]

On 2/5/18 18:51, Tom Lane wrote:
> So I can see two ways to approach this: add two new subsections at the end
> of xindex.sgml, or create a new chapter about b-trees in Part VII
> ("Internals") to go beside the existing ones about the more recently added
> index types.  The latter would make more sense if anyone was inspired to
> write something comparable in length to the existing per-index-type
> chapters.  But I'm not volunteering to do that, so if it's a chapter it'd
> be a mighty thin one to start with.

xindex seems better to me.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut  http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services