Re: locking [user] catalog tables vs 2pc vs logical rep
От | Amit Kapila |
---|---|
Тема | Re: locking [user] catalog tables vs 2pc vs logical rep |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAA4eK1LL+dF9Yn9NbvO3HP5dnCWKTDczc9UrSqwCohKaFJa+jw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | RE: locking [user] catalog tables vs 2pc vs logical rep ("osumi.takamichi@fujitsu.com" <osumi.takamichi@fujitsu.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 12:03 PM osumi.takamichi@fujitsu.com <osumi.takamichi@fujitsu.com> wrote: > > On Wednesday, June 9, 2021 12:06 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 8, 2021 at 6:24 PM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > 3) Should [user] catalog tables be catalog tables or user catalog > > > tables [user] catalog tables > > > > > > > The third point is not clear. Can you please elaborate by quoting the exact > > change from the patch? > IIUC, he means to replace all descriptions "[user] catalog tables" > with "catalog tables or user catalog tables" in the patch, > because seemingly we don't use square brackets to describe optional clause in > normal descriptions(like outside of synopsis and I don't find any example for this). > But, even if so, I would like to keep the current square brackets description, > which makes sentence short and simple. > +1. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: