Re: Naming of network_ops vs. inet_ops for SP-GIST

On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 03:22:44PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wonder whether we shouldn't just revert this table to
> showing opclass names, and avert our eyes from the theoretical
> inconsistency.  Michael, looks like it was your 7a1cd5260
> that changed it; what do you think?

Yes, the docs should be fixed here.  The intention is not to show the
operator families but the names of the opclasses.  I can only spot one
difference in SpGiST for network_ops -> inet_ops as of the report.
BRIN, GIN and GiST look to be clean after a second lookup.

I don't have a strong opinion about the naming inconsistency between
the opclass name and the opfamily name in this case, though, couldn't
it create more problems than actually fix something?

Anyway, attached is a patch for the docs.  Thoughts?
--
Michael