Re: Ordering in guc.c vs. config.sgml vs. postgresql.sample.conf
| От | Magnus Hagander |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Ordering in guc.c vs. config.sgml vs. postgresql.sample.conf |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CABUevEypKsehnca5_ZY3oaRKVGnFAGUkZJZ059zmTnZae37N2g@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Ordering in guc.c vs. config.sgml vs. postgresql.sample.conf (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Ordering in guc.c vs. config.sgml vs. postgresql.sample.conf
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 8:58 PM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
Hi,
While working on
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CABUevEzwMa9y+Bp4Fi4fE4hmPfZMjOZOmuLVtbHhPWtcujrmLg@mail.gmail.com
I once more taken aback by the total lack of consistency between the
three files in $subject. Some of the inconsistency of guc.c vs. the rest
comes from having separate lists for different datatypes - hard to avoid
- but even disregarding that, there seems to be little to no
consistency.
How about we try to order them the same? That's obviously not a 9.6
topic at this point, but it'd probably be good to that early in 9.7.
Agreed, at least between the documentation and postgresql.conf.sample. That's also the order that users are likely to look at.
guc.c might be better to just stick to alphabetical per group. (Which we also don't do today, of course, but it could be a better way to do it there)
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: