From 54aa5ef7f2dbe979843daf0c7a0d98f6709da4e6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2013 23:08:17 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Fix a couple of typos
Noted by Peter Geoghegan
---
doc/src/sgml/pgstatstatements.sgml | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/pgstatstatements.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/pgstatstatements.sgml
index c607710ccda..1fefeab2292 100644
--- a/doc/src/sgml/pgstatstatements.sgml
+++ b/doc/src/sgml/pgstatstatements.sgml
@@ -263,13 +263,13 @@
<para>
As a rule of thumb, an assumption of the stability or comparability
- of <structfield>querid</> values should be predicated on the the
+ of <structfield>queryid</> values should be predicated on the the
underlying catalog metadata and hash function implementation
details exactly matching. Any two servers participating in any
variety of replication based on physical WAL-replay can be expected
- to have identical <structfield>querid</> values for the same query.
+ to have identical <structfield>queryid</> values for the same query.
Logical replication schemes do not have replicas comparable in all
- relevant regards, and so <structfield>querid</> will not be a
+ relevant regards, and so <structfield>queryid</> will not be a
useful identifier for accumulating costs for the entire replica
set. If in doubt, direct testing is recommended.
</para>
--
GitLab