Re: doc: Clarify Routines and Extension Membership

"David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> writes:

+      A function that's marked as dependent on an extension is dropped when the
+      extension is dropped, even if cascade is not specified.
+      dependency checking in restrict mode <xref linkend="sql-dropextension"/>.
+      A function can depend upon multiple extensions, and will be dropped when
+      any one of those extensions is dropped.

Third line here seems like a copy/paste mistake?  Also I'd tend
to mark up the keyword as <literal>CASCADE</literal>.

+      This form marks the procedure as dependent on the extension, or no longer
+      dependent on that extension if <literal>NO</literal> is specified.

The/that inconsistency ... choose one.  Or actually, the "an ... the"
combination you used elsewhere doesn't grate on the ear either.

+      For each extension, refuse to drop anything if any objects (other than the
+      extensions listed) depend on it.  However, its own member objects, and routines
+      that are explicitly dependent on this extension, are skipped.
+      This is the default.

"skipped" seems like a horrible choice of word; it could easily be read as
"they don't get dropped".  I am not convinced that mentioning the member
objects here is an improvement either.  In the first sentence you are
treating each extension as a monolithic object; why not in the second?

            regards, tom lane