Re: Proposal: adding a better description in psql command about large objects
Thibaud W. <thibaud.walkowiak@dalibo.com>
From: "Thibaud W." <thibaud.walkowiak@dalibo.com>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Date: 2022-06-07T09:49:21Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 6/3/22 19:29, Nathan Bossart wrote: > On Fri, Jun 03, 2022 at 12:56:20PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> writes: >>> Another option could be to move it after the "Input/Output" section so that >>> it's closer to some other commands that involve files. I can't say I have >>> a strong opinion about whether/where to move it, though. >> Yeah, I thought of that choice too, but it ends up placing the >> Large Objects section higher up the list than seems warranted on >> frequency-of-use grounds. > Fair point. > >> After looking at the output I concluded that we'd be better off to >> stick with the normal indentation amount, and break the lo_import >> entry into two lines to make that work. One reason for this is >> that some translators might've already settled on a different >> indentation amount in order to cope with translated parameter names, >> and deviating from the normal here will just complicate their lives. >> So that leaves me proposing v5. > I see. As you noted earlier, moving the entries higher makes the > inconsistent indentation less appealing, too. So this LGTM. > >> (I also fixed the out-of-date line count in helpVariables.) > Yeah, it looks like 7844c99 missed this. Thanks, output is more readable this way. Best regards. -- Thibaud W.
Commits
-
Improve psql \?'s description of large-object-related commands.
- 1fbe94084fd3 15.0 landed