Re: DOCS: Missing <structfield> tags for some SEQUENCE fields

Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>

From: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
To: Chao Li <li.evan.chao@gmail.com>
Cc: Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2025-11-14T03:53:20Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Nov 13, 2025 at 4:46 PM Chao Li <li.evan.chao@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Nov 13, 2025, at 13:17, Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > While reviewing the recent patches for SEQUENCE documentation I found
> > [1] a few more instances where the <structfield> tag should have been
> > used for some of the sequence fields (per the recent push [2]).
> >
>
> Good catch. LGTM. I rendered the html pages and viewed them, the pages also look good.
>

Why do we think using <structfield> tag is appropriate instead of the
current <literal> tag? The explanation of the is_called says: "Sets
the sequence object's current value, and optionally its is_called
flag.", so from "object's current value", are we deducing it is the
same as struct? Ideally, it should be used to mark up the name of a
field in a struct which is close to what we are doing here. Do we have
a similar usage at other places in the docs?

-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.



Commits

  1. Doc: Use <structfield> markup for sequence fields.

  2. doc: adjust "Replication Slot" to mention physical & logical

  3. doc: consistently use "structname" and "structfield" markup