Re: [DOCS] Example non-Latin words for text search parser docs?
Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Actually I was wondering if we should use actual words. So instead of > > "foo" we could use "elephant" for asciiword and "Éléphant" (french) for > > word. And for the hword, "sous-espèces" (which appears on the French > > Wikipedia) would do. > > Hmm ... I see a potential problem with that, which is that if someone > happened to be viewing the page on something that dropped the accents, > or even just made them too small to be easily readable, the examples > wouldn't make any sense at all. > > I have no problem with "elephant" as a sample asciiword, but for the > sample non-ascii word I'd suggest something that (a) is clearly not > English and (b) as much as possible, everybody knows has an accent. > At least in large parts of the US, something like "mañana" would > work nicely. OK I went with that. I also used real spanish hyphenated words in the hword examples. I also changed the domains foo.com to example.com, just because I'm anal enough to do it. The hword_asciipart I'm not 100% sure about. I used this: militar in the context político-militar, or postgresql in the context postgresql-beta1 What I wanted to emphasize here is that it's the "ascii-ness" of the part that matters, not that of the complete token. The reason I'm not sure about it is that it makes the table wider. -- Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
Re: [DOCS] Example non-Latin words for text search parser docs?
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The hword_asciipart I'm not 100% sure about. I used this: > militar in the context político-militar, or postgresql in the > context postgresql-beta1 Hmm ... I went and looked at the page on developer.postgresql.org, and it's just as I feared: with slightly bleary morning eyes, the accents over the i's are not obvious, and so you have to look *real* close before you get the point of the examples. It doesn't help that 'politico' with no accent is exactly how the phrase would be spelled in English, and so it's easy to not see the accent because you're not expecting one. The other examples seem alright, but I think that one's a bad choice. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Re: [DOCS] Example non-Latin words for text search parser docs?
Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > The hword_asciipart I'm not 100% sure about. I used this: > > militar in the context pol�tico-militar, or postgresql in the > > context postgresql-beta1 > > Hmm ... I went and looked at the page on developer.postgresql.org, > and it's just as I feared: with slightly bleary morning eyes, the > accents over the i's are not obvious, and so you have to look *real* > close before you get the point of the examples. It doesn't help that > 'politico' with no accent is exactly how the phrase would be spelled > in English, and so it's easy to not see the accent because you're not > expecting one. The other examples seem alright, but I think that one's > a bad choice. Damn. Ok, I'll search for a different example. We're making progress nonetheless ;-) -- Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
Re: [DOCS] Example non-Latin words for text search parser docs?
Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: > > Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > The hword_asciipart I'm not 100% sure about. I used this: > > > militar in the context pol?tico-militar, or postgresql in the > > > context postgresql-beta1 > > > > Hmm ... I went and looked at the page on developer.postgresql.org, > > and it's just as I feared: with slightly bleary morning eyes, the > > accents over the i's are not obvious, and so you have to look *real* > > close before you get the point of the examples. It doesn't help that > > 'politico' with no accent is exactly how the phrase would be spelled > > in English, and so it's easy to not see the accent because you're not > > expecting one. The other examples seem alright, but I think that one's > > a bad choice. > > Damn. Ok, I'll search for a different example. We're making progress > nonetheless ;-) How about "lógico-matemática"? (If that one doesn't work for you, maybe we should look into words in another language, more different from english. Maybe Magnus can suggest hyphenated words with weird letters). -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.amazon.com/gp/registry/DXLWNGRJD34J "La rebeldía es la virtud original del hombre" (Arthur Schopenhauer) ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [DOCS] Example non-Latin words for text search parser docs?
Am Donnerstag, 25. Oktober 2007 schrieb Tom Lane: > Hmm ... I went and looked at the page on developer.postgresql.org, > and it's just as I feared: with slightly bleary morning eyes, the > accents over the i's are not obvious, and so you have to look *real* > close before you get the point of the examples. By that standard, you will have to use non-Latin letters, which might decrease the usability of the examples much more. There are not likely to be any Latin-looking letters that are not ASCII and are not resembling another Latin letter. -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/ ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
Re: [DOCS] Example non-Latin words for text search parser docs?
Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Am Donnerstag, 25. Oktober 2007 schrieb Tom Lane: > > Hmm ... I went and looked at the page on developer.postgresql.org, > > and it's just as I feared: with slightly bleary morning eyes, the > > accents over the i's are not obvious, and so you have to look *real* > > close before you get the point of the examples. > > By that standard, you will have to use non-Latin letters, which might > decrease > the usability of the examples much more. There are not likely to be any > Latin-looking letters that are not ASCII and are not resembling another Latin > letter. I think it would suffice to use an accent over a vowel that's not an i. -- Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [DOCS] Example non-Latin words for text search parser docs?
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> Am Donnerstag, 25. Oktober 2007 schrieb Tom Lane: >>> Hmm ... I went and looked at the page on developer.postgresql.org, >>> and it's just as I feared: with slightly bleary morning eyes, the >>> accents over the i's are not obvious, and so you have to look *real* >>> close before you get the point of the examples. >> >> By that standard, you will have to use non-Latin letters, which might >> decrease >> the usability of the examples much more. There are not likely to be any >> Latin-looking letters that are not ASCII and are not resembling another >> Latin >> letter. > I think it would suffice to use an accent over a vowel that's not an i. Yeah, that would help. But the real problem with pol?tico-militar is that it looks way too much like the English equivalent --- my first reaction was "huh, he forgot the 'y'". I'm after a word that *looks* not-English. Alvaro's comment that maybe we need to look to something besides Spanish seems on point. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
Re: [DOCS] Example non-Latin words for text search parser docs?
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > How about "lógico-matemática"? Works for me. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
[DOCS] Pattern for use of the alias "Postgres"
[ BCC to docs because this might affect documentation too.] You probably remember the discussion about promoting the use of the alias "Postgres" in addition to the official name "PostgreSQL". I have changed the FAQ so that in paragraphs with multiple references to "PostgreSQL" we also use the alias "Postgres". I have talked about a similar change to our documentation and perhaps the web site, but I am _not_ ready to discuss those. What I want to ask about is an idea a few people have mentioned. They don't like that we change usage in the same paragraph. The suggestion is to mention that "Postgres" is an alias to "PostgreSQL" at the top of the document and just use "Postgres" in the remainder of the document. This seems like a lot more use of the alias than I though we wanted as a group, but because several of the people suggesting this also didn't want the alias at all, I figure I should ask and we can discuss it. So, for the FAQ, which currently uses the second-entry-per-paragraph logic, should it be changed to the logic suggested above where every mention but the first is "Postgres"? (This will of course affect the documentation changes when we are ready to discuss those.) -- Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
Re: [DOCS] Pattern for use of the alias "Postgres"
Bruce Momjian wrote: > So, for the FAQ, which currently uses the second-entry-per-paragraph > logic, should it be changed to the logic suggested above where every > mention but the first is "Postgres"? (This will of course affect the > documentation changes when we are ready to discuss those.) Just undo the whole thing. The project name is what it is. -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/ ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [DOCS] Pattern for use of the alias "Postgres"
On Thu, 2007-10-25 at 21:44 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > So, for the FAQ, which currently uses the second-entry-per-paragraph > > logic, should it be changed to the logic suggested above where every > > mention but the first is "Postgres"? (This will of course affect > the > > documentation changes when we are ready to discuss those.) > > Just undo the whole thing. The project name is what it is. +1. Regards, -- Devrim GÜNDÜZ PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting Co-Authors: plPHP, ODBCng - http://www.commandprompt.com/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [DOCS] Pattern for use of the alias "Postgres"
Devrim G?ND?Z wrote: -- Start of PGP signed section. > On Thu, 2007-10-25 at 21:44 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > So, for the FAQ, which currently uses the second-entry-per-paragraph > > > logic, should it be changed to the logic suggested above where every > > > mention but the first is "Postgres"? (This will of course affect > > the > > > documentation changes when we are ready to discuss those.) > > > > Just undo the whole thing. The project name is what it is. > > +1. Let's not get sidetracked here. There was already agreement in advocacy to promote the use of the alias, and this thread is to discuss that, not to revisit whether we should use an alias or not. If you want to bring up that issue, start a thread and try to get agreement on it. -- Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [DOCS] Pattern for use of the alias "Postgres"
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 16:10:31 -0400 (EDT) Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Just undo the whole thing. The project name is what it is. > > > > +1. > > Let's not get sidetracked here. There was already agreement in > advocacy to promote the use of the alias, and this thread is to > discuss that, not to revisit whether we should use an alias or not. > If you want to bring up that issue, start a thread and try to get > agreement on it. > Woah, let's be very clear here. There was zero agreement to promote the name postgres. There was agreement to state that Postgres was an acceptable form of the word PostgreSQL. Which I do still agree with, but that is far from "promoting". Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ UNIQUE NOT NULL Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [DOCS] Pattern for use of the alias "Postgres"
Hi, On Thu, 2007-10-25 at 16:10 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > There was already agreement in advocacy to promote the use of the > alias, Really? -- Devrim GÜNDÜZ PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting Co-Authors: plPHP, ODBCng - http://www.commandprompt.com/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [DOCS] Pattern for use of the alias "Postgres"
Joshua D. Drake wrote: -- Start of PGP signed section. > On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 16:10:31 -0400 (EDT) > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Just undo the whole thing. The project name is what it is. > > > > > > +1. > > > > Let's not get sidetracked here. There was already agreement in > > advocacy to promote the use of the alias, and this thread is to > > discuss that, not to revisit whether we should use an alias or not. > > If you want to bring up that issue, start a thread and try to get > > agreement on it. > > > > Woah, let's be very clear here. There was zero agreement to promote the > name postgres. There was agreement to state that Postgres was an > acceptable form of the word PostgreSQL. > > Which I do still agree with, but that is far from "promoting". Here is a thread where I propose the "promoting" idea and general agreement on it: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-advocacy/2007-09/msg00257.php and here is where I think you are agreeing to do such promotion in the FAQ, at least: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-advocacy/2007-09/msg00279.php I have the email addresses and opinions of a majority of advocacy posters. I can post it again if you want or we can go through this all again, probably with the same result. -- Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [DOCS] Pattern for use of the alias "Postgres"
Hi Bruce, On Thu, 2007-10-25 at 16:50 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > I have the email addresses and opinions of a majority of advocacy > posters. I can post it again if you want or we can go through this > all again, probably with the same result. So you say -advocacy list members are the ones who can change project's name? Interesting. Regards, -- Devrim GÜNDÜZ PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting Co-Authors: plPHP, ODBCng - http://www.commandprompt.com/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [DOCS] Pattern for use of the alias "Postgres"
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 16:50:34 -0400 (EDT) Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Woah, let's be very clear here. There was zero agreement to promote > > the name postgres. There was agreement to state that Postgres was an > > acceptable form of the word PostgreSQL. > > > > Which I do still agree with, but that is far from "promoting". > > Here is a thread where I propose the "promoting" idea and general > agreement on it: > > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-advocacy/2007-09/msg00257.php > > and here is where I think you are agreeing to do such promotion in the > FAQ, at least: > > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-advocacy/2007-09/msg00279.php No. That was me stating that the current FAQ stating that Postgres was an acceptable form of PostgreSQL was enough. Which I do still agree with. I have stated that *if* we were going to make wholesale documentation changes that we should do it in the form of PostgreSQL, hereafter known as Postgres... I don't like it but I believe it would be a fair compromise. > > I have the email addresses and opinions of a majority of advocacy > posters. I can post it again if you want or we can go through this > all again, probably with the same result. > You are welcome to bring it up again. I am not going to. I find the issue currently closed with the FAQ entry. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ UNIQUE NOT NULL Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [DOCS] Pattern for use of the alias "Postgres"
Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > > Woah, let's be very clear here. There was zero agreement to promote > > > the name postgres. There was agreement to state that Postgres was an > > > acceptable form of the word PostgreSQL. > > > > > > Which I do still agree with, but that is far from "promoting". > > > > Here is a thread where I propose the "promoting" idea and general > > agreement on it: > > > > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-advocacy/2007-09/msg00257.php > > > > and here is where I think you are agreeing to do such promotion in the > > FAQ, at least: > > > > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-advocacy/2007-09/msg00279.php > > No. That was me stating that the current FAQ stating that Postgres was > an acceptable form of PostgreSQL was enough. Which I do still agree > with. OK, I misunderstood then. I was asking where to promote it and you were saying just the FAQ which I thought meant promote usage in the FAQ. Sorry. > I have stated that *if* we were going to make wholesale documentation > changes that we should do it in the form of PostgreSQL, hereafter known > as Postgres... > > I don't like it but I believe it would be a fair compromise. Yea, I think so. If we make that change we could go until 8.4 beta and then see how we are doing with making an easily-prounced alias name. We might need to make no further changes, or we might want to change it back for some reason. I will give another 1-2 days for feedback on the "pattern" usage issue. So far I think everyone so far has said they like just a first mention of PostgreSQL in the document and then Postgres in the rest of the document _if_ we are going to do that. Then I will start a new thread to ask about actually doing that change. I thought the second-in-paragraph style was minimal because it is like, e.g. "Bill Cohen was caught stealing. Cohen was seen under the bushes on Cobbs Lane.". Or with Coke, "Coca-cola is expense. Coke is also bad for you". But it seems people don't like that usage in practice. (FYI, I see some "Postgres" mentions have gotten in the 8.3 release notes already from Tom. I will have to adjust those once we make a final decision, but you can see how it looks now.) -- Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [DOCS] Pattern for use of the alias "Postgres"
Bruce Momjian wrote: > Let's not get sidetracked here. There was already agreement in > advocacy to promote the use of the alias, and this thread is to > discuss that, not to revisit whether we should use an alias or not. Advocacy opinions have no bearing on proper documentation writing. Nor do I believe that there was an actual agreement. -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/ ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [DOCS] Pattern for use of the alias "Postgres"
Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Let's not get sidetracked here. ?There was already agreement in > > advocacy to promote the use of the alias, and this thread is to > > discuss that, not to revisit whether we should use an alias or not. > > Advocacy opinions have no bearing on proper documentation writing. Nor > do I believe that there was an actual agreement. I disagree. -- Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
[DOCS] Example of plpgsql RETURN NEXT
Seems we never had an example in the documentation of plpgsql RETURN NEXT. I got a submission from Ulrich Kroener and have applied it, attached. -- Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + Index: doc/src/sgml/plpgsql.sgml === RCS file: /cvsroot/pgsql/doc/src/sgml/plpgsql.sgml,v retrieving revision 1.116 diff -c -c -r1.116 plpgsql.sgml *** doc/src/sgml/plpgsql.sgml 25 Jul 2007 04:19:08 - 1.116 --- doc/src/sgml/plpgsql.sgml 26 Oct 2007 01:09:08 - *** *** 1411,1426 ! Functions that use RETURN NEXT or ! RETURN QUERY should be called in the ! following fashion: ! SELECT * FROM some_func(); ! That is, the function must be used as a table source in a ! FROM clause. --- 1411,1447 ! Here is an example of a function using RETURN ! NEXT: ! CREATE TABLE foo (fooid INT, foosubid INT, fooname TEXT); ! INSERT INTO foo VALUES (1, 2, 'three'); ! INSERT INTO foo VALUES (4, 5, 'six'); ! ! CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION getAllFoo() RETURNS SETOF foo AS ! $BODY$ ! DECLARE ! r foo%rowtype; ! BEGIN ! FOR r IN SELECT * FROM foo ! WHERE fooid > 0 ! LOOP ! -- can do some processing here ! RETURN NEXT r; -- return next row of SELECT ! END LOOP; ! RETURN; ! END ! $BODY$ ! LANGUAGE 'plpgsql' ; ! ! SELECT * FROM getallfoo(); ! Note that functions using RETURN NEXT or ! RETURN QUERY must be called as a table source in ! a FROM clause. ! ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
