Re: [DOCS] simple wording fix
On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 10:43 PM, wrote: > The following documentation comment has been logged on the website: > > Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.6/static/parallel-plans.html > Description: > > Hi! > > In the first paragraph of the second part of the third sentence, this: > > "it must constructed so that each process which executes the plan" > > should be: > > "it must be constructed so that each process which executes the > plan". > > That is, the "be" is missing. Fixed. Thanks for the report! Regards, -- Fujii Masao -- Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list ([email protected]) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs
[DOCS] pg_logical_slot_get_changes needs clarification
The following documentation comment has been logged on the website: Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.4/static/functions-admin.html Description: It is not obvious from reading the description for function pg_logical_slot_get_changes that it is a "destructive" function, and this bit me. I was not clearly aware that this function consumes the replication stream such that it's no longer available if I use it to look at the logical stream, i.e., I MUST use the peek function for that purpose. This is more clear in the full examples of logical decoding. Also, it says in the "peek" function that the peek function does not consume changes like the get function - but that should be stated clearly in the get function description. The name of the function itself is part of the problem: "get" does not normally indicate "destroy" as well Thanks! BecauseThere should b -- Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list ([email protected]) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs
