Re: documentation structure
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
From: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2024-04-16T18:23:10Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
docs: Consistently use <optional> to indicate optional parameters
- 0d829703363b 18.0 landed
-
docs: Consolidate into new "WAL for Extensions" chapter.
- 09d9800e5282 17.0 landed
-
freespace: Don't return blocks past the end of the main fork.
- 935829743151 17.0 cited
-
docs: Merge separate chapters on built-in index AMs into one.
- fe8eaa54420c 17.0 landed
-
docs: Demote "Monitoring Disk Usage" from chapter to section.
- f470b5c67924 17.0 landed
-
doc: move system views section to its own chapter
- 64d364bb39cb 16.0 cited
Hi, On 2024-03-19 17:39:39 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > My own pet docs peeve is a purely editorial one: func.sgml is a 30k line > beast, and I think there's a good case for splitting out at least the > larger chunks of it. I think we should work on generating a lot of func.sgml. Particularly the signature etc should just come from pg_proc.dat, it's pointlessly painful to generate that by hand. And for a lot of the functions we should probably move the existing func.sgml comments to the description in pg_proc.dat. I suspect that we can't just generate all the documentation from pg_proc, because of xrefs etc. Although perhaps we could just strip those out for pg_proc. We'd need to add some more metadata to pg_proc, for grouping kinds of functions together. But that seems doable. Greetings, Andres Freund