Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign?
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20266.1587148695@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign? (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign?
Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign? |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: > On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 8:25 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> Attached are screenshots of the same segment of table 9.10 as before >> and of the initial portion of 9.30, the patch against HEAD to produce >> these, and a hacky patch on the website's main.css to get it to go >> along. Without the last you just get all the subsidiary stuff >> left-justified if you build with STYLE=website, which isn't impossibly >> unreadable but it's not the desired presentation. > These seem very nice, and way more readable than the version with > which you started the thread. Glad you like 'em ;-). Do you have an opinion about what to do with the operator tables --- ie do we need a column with the operator name at the left? regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: