When we added the GUC units feature, we didn't make any great effort
to adjust the documentation of individual GUCs; they tended to still
say things like "this is the number of milliseconds that ...", even
though users might prefer to write some other units, and SHOW might
even show the value in other units. Commit 6c9fb69f2 made an effort
to improve this situation, but I thought it made things less readable
by injecting units information in mid-sentence. It also wasn't very
consistent, and did not touch all the GUCs that have units.
To improve matters, standardize on the phrasing "If this value is
specified without units, it is taken as <units>". Also, try to
standardize where this is mentioned, right before the specification
of the default. (In a couple of places, doing that would've required
more rewriting than seemed justified, so I wasn't 100% consistent
about that.) I also tried to use the phrases "amount of time",
"amount of memory", etc rather than describing the contents of GUCs
in other ways, as those were the majority usage in places that weren't
overcommitting to a particular unit. (I left "length of time" alone
in a couple of places, though.)
I failed to resist the temptation to copy-edit some awkward text, too.
Backpatch to v12, like 6c9fb69f2, mainly because v12 hasn't diverged
much from HEAD yet.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15882.1571942223@sss.pgh.pa.us
In v11 or before, this setting could not take effect in crash recovery
because it's specified in recovery.conf and crash recovery always
starts without recovery.conf. But commit 2dedf4d9a8 integrated
recovery.conf into postgresql.conf and which unexpectedly allowed
this setting to take effect even in crash recovery. This is definitely
not good behavior.
To fix the issue, this commit makes crash recovery always ignore
recovery_min_apply_delay setting.
Back-patch to v12 where the issue was added.
Author: Fujii Masao
Reviewed-by: Michael Paquier
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAHGQGwEyD6HdZLfdWc+95g=VQFPR4zQL4n+yHxQgGEGjaSVheQ@mail.gmail.com
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/e445616d-023e-a268-8aa1-67b8b335340c@pgmasters.net
This fixes multiple areas of the documentation:
- COPY for its past compatibility section.
- SET ROLE mentioning INHERITS instead of INHERIT
- PREPARE referring to stmt_name, that is not present.
- Extension documentation about format name with upgrade scripts.
Backpatch down to 9.4 for the relevant parts.
Author: Alexander Lakhin
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/bf95233a-9943-b341-e2ff-a860c28af481@gmail.com
Backpatch-through: 9.4
Previously, our docs would say "Specifies the number of milliseconds"
but it wasn't clear that "milliseconds" was merely the default unit.
New text says "Specifies duration (defaults to milliseconds)", which is
clearer.
Reported-by: basil.bourque@gmail.com
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15912-2e35e9026f61230b@postgresql.org
Backpatch-through: 12
Commit aa087ec64 was a bit over-hasty about the doc changes needed
while splitting pg_statistic_ext_data off from pg_statistic_ext.
It duplicated one para and inserted another in what seems to me
to be the wrong section. Fix that up, and in passing do some minor
copy-editing.
Per report from noborusai.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAAM3qnLXLUz4mOBkqa8jxigpKhKNxzSuvwpjvCRPvO5EqWjxSg@mail.gmail.com
The behavior described in the PREPARE man page applies only for the
default plan_cache_mode setting, so explain that properly. Rewrite
some of the text while I'm here. Per suggestion from Bruce.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20190930155505.GA21095@momjian.us
This commit adds a mention that the order of columns specified during
multi-column most-common-value statistics is insignificant, and tries to
simplify examples.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20190828162238.GA8360@momjian.us
Backpatch-through: 12
The documentation states that no target settings will be used when
standby.signal is present, but this is not quite the case since
recovery_target_timeline is a valid recovery target for a standby.
Update the documentation with this exception.
Author: David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/e445616d-023e-a268-8aa1-67b8b335340c%40pgmasters.net
The array <@ and @> operators do not worry about duplicates: if every
member of array X matches some element of array Y, then X is contained
in Y, even if several members of X get matched to the same Y member.
This was not explicitly stated in the docs though, so improve matters.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/156614120484.1310.310161642239149585@wrigleys.postgresql.org
In the v12 contributors list, remove a couple of duplicates
that had crept in due to variant spellings of a person's name.
Try to standardize Japanese names as given-name-first.
Alexander Lakhin
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/a8263c91-6a21-61d4-3156-34bf2fe54e15@gmail.com
Remove mention of ECPG's DECLARE STATEMENT, since that was reverted
yesterday. Rewrite some other entries per suggestions from Peter
Eisentraut. Make a couple of desultory wording and markup adjustments.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/d4dff575-90ab-9c8c-cc6f-8c657e2de665@2ndquadrant.com
This reverts commit bd7c95f0c1,
along with assorted follow-on fixes. There are some questions
about the definition and implementation of that statement, and
we don't have time to resolve them before v13 release. Rather
than ship the feature and then have backwards-compatibility
concerns constraining any redesign, let's remove it for now
and try again later.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/TY2PR01MB2443EC8286995378AEB7D9F8F5B10@TY2PR01MB2443.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com
Provide some documentation about the differences between XQuery
regular expressions and those supported by Spencer's regex engine.
Since SQL now exposes XQuery regexps with the LIKE_REGEX operator,
I made this a standalone section designed to help somebody who
has to translate a LIKE_REGEX query to Postgres. (Eventually we might
extend Spencer's engine to allow precise implementation of XQuery,
but not today.)
Reference that in the jsonpath docs, provide definitions of the
XQuery flag letters, and add a description of the JavaScript-inspired
string literal syntax used within jsonpath. Also point out explicitly
that backslashes used within like_regex patterns will need to be doubled.
This also syncs the docs with the decision implemented in commit
d5b90cd64 to desupport XQuery's 'x' flag for now.
Jonathan Katz and Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAPpHfdvDci4iqNF9fhRkTqhe-5_8HmzeLt56drH%2B_Rv2rNRqfg@mail.gmail.com
It's important users be able to know (without looking at the source code)
that running DDL or DDL-like commands can interrupt autovacuum which can
lead to a lot of dead tuples and hence slower database operations.
Reported-by: James Coleman
Author: James Coleman
Reviewed-by: Amit Kapila
Backpatch-through: 9.4
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAAaqYe-XYyNwML1=f=gnd0qWg46PnvD=BDrCZ5-L94B887XVxQ@mail.gmail.com
1. Commit 7086be6e3 should have documented the limitation that the direct
modification is disabled when WCO constraints are present, but didn't,
which is definitely my fault. Update the documentation (Postgres 9.6
onwards).
2. Commit fc22b6623 should have documented the limitation that the direct
modification is disabled when generated columns are defined, but
didn't. Update the documentation (Postgres 12 onwards).
Author: Etsuro Fujita
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAPmGK14AYCPunLb6TRz1CQsW5Le01Z2ox8LSOKH0P-cOVDcQRA%40mail.gmail.com
The example used to explain 'Looping Through Query Results' uses
pseudo-materialized views. Replace it with a more up-to-date example
which does the same thing with actual materialized views, which have
been available since PostgreSQL 9.3.
In the passing, change '%' as format specifier instead of '%s' as is used
in other examples in plpgsql.sgml.
Reported-by: Ian Barwick
Author: Ian Barwick
Reviewed-by: Amit Kapila
Backpatch-through: 9.4
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/9a70d393-7904-4918-c97c-649f6d114b6a@2ndquadrant.com
When using COMMIT AND CHAIN or ROLLBACK AND CHAIN not in an explicit
transaction block, the previous implementation would leave a
transaction block active in the ROLLBACK case but not the COMMIT case.
To fix for now, error out when using these commands not in an explicit
transaction block. This restriction could be lifted if a sensible
definition and implementation is found.
Bug: #15977
Author: fn ln <emuser20140816@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>
Copy-edit or rewrite some items, add some items that I thought
deserved documenting, remove some others that didn't (notably,
I'm not on board with documenting documentation changes), fix
some poorly-pointed links, move some items to other sections,
etc etc.