Обсуждение: suggest about bpchar data type in the document

On Wed, 2022-09-14 at 17:41 +0800, yanliang lei wrote:
> I hope that：
> 
>  in the  https://www.postgresql.org/docs/14/datatype-characterin.html ，It needs to be written clearly  “bpchar” data
type，
> 
> and in the above url, Only mentioned “blank padded” ，If someone does not know  this knowledge point（blank padded
=bp），he/she  willmake a detour in the study of  character datatype。
 
> 
> so，To make the document more friendly, I suggest that： in
the  https://www.postgresql.org/docs/14/datatype-characterin.htm  ，Itneeds to be written clearly  “bpchar” data type。
 

+1

I think that adding "bpchar(n)" in table 8.4 would be a good thing.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe

On Wed, 2022-09-14 at 18:48 +0200, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> On Wed, 2022-09-14 at 17:41 +0800, yanliang lei wrote:
> > I hope that：
> > 
> >  in the  https://www.postgresql.org/docs/14/datatype-characterin.html ，It needs to be written clearly  “bpchar”
datatype，
 
> > 
> > and in the above url, Only mentioned “blank padded” ，If someone does not know  this knowledge point
> > （blank padded =bp），he/she  will make a detour in the study of  character datatype。
> > 
> > so，To make the document more friendly, I suggest that： in
the  https://www.postgresql.org/docs/14/datatype-characterin.htm
> > It needs to be written clearly  “bpchar” data type。
> 
> +1
> 
> I think that adding "bpchar(n)" in table 8.4 would be a good thing.

Here is a patch for that.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe

Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> writes:
>> I think that adding "bpchar(n)" in table 8.4 would be a good thing.

> Here is a patch for that.

There would need to be some mention of it in the paras below, too.

            regards, tom lane

On Wed, 2022-09-28 at 10:48 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> writes:
> > > I think that adding "bpchar(n)" in table 8.4 would be a good thing.
> 
> > Here is a patch for that.
> 
> There would need to be some mention of it in the paras below, too.

True.  I think the attached should be sufficient.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe

Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> writes:
> On Wed, 2022-09-28 at 10:48 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> There would need to be some mention of it in the paras below, too.

> True.  I think the attached should be sufficient.

Pushed.  I failed to resist the temptation to do some further cleanup
in the same area.

            regards, tom lane

On Wed, 2022-09-28 at 12:32 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> writes:
> > On Wed, 2022-09-28 at 10:48 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > > There would need to be some mention of it in the paras below, too.
> 
> > True.  I think the attached should be sufficient.
> 
> Pushed.  I failed to resist the temptation to do some further cleanup
> in the same area.

Thanks for your diligent failure, as always.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe