On 2021-Oct-08, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> I remain of the opinion that the comments should be
> retained, but we can leave that for somebody else to
> decide.
So I just realized that I added this comment in 8c250f3741f.
The point of this comment is that the list of options to which
"direction"
On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 08:43:34AM +0200, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> On Mon, 2021-10-11 at 23:14 -0400, rir wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 04:15:01PM -0400, rir wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 08, 2021 at 02:47:43PM +0200, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2021-10-07 at 16:06 -0400, rir wrote:
> >
> >
On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 10:46 AM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Yeah, this one is new as of commit 1e55e7d1755c; ISTM we should just fix it.
Agreed. Pushed Pavel's patch just now.
Thanks
--
Peter Geoghegan
On 2021-Oct-12, Pavel Luzanov wrote:
> Hello,
>
> > > When trying to make a link to the new vacuum_multixact_failsafe_age
> > > parameter,
> > > I found the wrong ID for this guc (missed word vacuum).
> > > Please consider this patch for a fix.
> > It is good to be consistent, but the name of
Hello,
When trying to make a link to the new vacuum_multixact_failsafe_age parameter,
I found the wrong ID for this guc (missed word vacuum).
Please consider this patch for a fix.
It is good to be consistent, but the name of the link is not essential, is it?
Changing it might break existing
On Tue, 2021-10-12 at 08:22 +0300, Pavel Luzanov wrote:
> When trying to make a link to the new vacuum_multixact_failsafe_age parameter,
> I found the wrong ID for this guc (missed word vacuum).
> Please consider this patch for a fix.
It is good to be consistent, but the name of the link is not
On Mon, 2021-10-11 at 23:14 -0400, rir wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 04:15:01PM -0400, rir wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 08, 2021 at 02:47:43PM +0200, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2021-10-07 at 16:06 -0400, rir wrote:
>
> > > FETCH [ direction ] [ FROM | IN ] cursor_name
>
> Should the pgplsql
