diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/ref/cluster.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/ref/cluster.sgml
index acb2468f7b..c181019b25 100644
--- a/doc/src/sgml/ref/cluster.sgml
+++ b/doc/src/sgml/ref/cluster.sgml
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
 <!--
-$PostgreSQL: pgsql/doc/src/sgml/ref/cluster.sgml,v 1.42 2007/04/08 02:07:35 tgl Exp $
+$PostgreSQL: pgsql/doc/src/sgml/ref/cluster.sgml,v 1.43 2007/05/11 19:40:07 neilc Exp $
 PostgreSQL documentation
 -->
 
@@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ CLUSTER
    not clustered.  That is, no attempt is made to store new or
    updated rows according to their index order.  (If one wishes, one can
    periodically recluster by issuing the command again.  Also, setting
-   the table's FILLFACTOR storage parameter to less than 100% can aid
+   the table's <literal>FILLFACTOR</literal> storage parameter to less than 100% can aid
    in preserving cluster ordering during updates, since updated rows
    are preferentially kept on the same page.)
   </para>
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/ref/truncate.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/ref/truncate.sgml
index 271d16af03..3dca068b45 100644
--- a/doc/src/sgml/ref/truncate.sgml
+++ b/doc/src/sgml/ref/truncate.sgml
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
 <!--
-$PostgreSQL: pgsql/doc/src/sgml/ref/truncate.sgml,v 1.23 2007/04/07 17:12:15 tgl Exp $
+$PostgreSQL: pgsql/doc/src/sgml/ref/truncate.sgml,v 1.24 2007/05/11 19:40:08 neilc Exp $
 PostgreSQL documentation
 -->
 
@@ -31,9 +31,9 @@ TRUNCATE [ TABLE ] <replaceable class="PARAMETER">name</replaceable> [, ...] [ C
    <command>TRUNCATE</command> quickly removes all rows from a set of
    tables. It has the same effect as an unqualified
    <command>DELETE</command> on each table, but since it does not actually
-   scan the tables it is faster; furthermore it reclaims disk space
-   immediately, rather than requiring a subsequent vacuum operation.
-   This is most useful on large tables.
+   scan the tables it is faster. Furthermore, it reclaims disk space
+   immediately, rather than requiring a subsequent <command>VACUUM</command>
+   operation. This is most useful on large tables.
   </para>
  </refsect1>
   
@@ -86,35 +86,38 @@ TRUNCATE [ TABLE ] <replaceable class="PARAMETER">name</replaceable> [, ...] [ C
    in the same command.  Checking validity in such cases would require table
    scans, and the whole point is not to do one.  The <literal>CASCADE</>
    option can be used to automatically include all dependent tables &mdash;
-   but be very careful when using this option, else you might lose data you
+   but be very careful when using this option, or else you might lose data you
    did not intend to!
   </para>
 
   <para>
-   <command>TRUNCATE</> will not run any user-defined <literal>ON
-   DELETE</literal> triggers that might exist for the tables.
+   <command>TRUNCATE</> will not run any <literal>ON DELETE</literal>
+   triggers that might exist for the tables.
   </para>
 
-  <para>
-   <command>TRUNCATE</> is not MVCC-safe (see <xref linkend="mvcc">
-   for general information about MVCC).  After truncation, the table
-   will appear empty to all concurrent transactions, even if they are
-   using a snapshot taken before the truncation occurred.  This will
-   only be an issue for a transaction that did not touch the table
-   before the truncation started &mdash; any transaction that has done
-   so would hold at least <literal>ACCESS SHARE</literal> lock,
-   which would block
-   <command>TRUNCATE</> until that transaction completes.  So
-   truncation will not cause any apparent inconsistency in the table
-   contents for successive queries on the same table, but it could
-   cause visible inconsistency between the contents of the
-   truncated table and other tables.
-  </para>
+  <warning>
+   <para>
+    <command>TRUNCATE</> is not MVCC-safe (see <xref linkend="mvcc">
+     for general information about MVCC).  After truncation, the table
+     will appear empty to all concurrent transactions, even if they
+     are using a snapshot taken before the truncation occurred.  This
+     will only be an issue for a transaction that did not access the
+     truncated table before the truncation happened &mdash; any
+     transaction that has done so would hold at least an
+     <literal>ACCESS SHARE</literal> lock, which would block
+     <command>TRUNCATE</> until that transaction completes.  So
+     truncation will not cause any apparent inconsistency in the table
+     contents for successive queries on the same table, but it could
+     cause visible inconsistency between the contents of the truncated
+     table and other tables in the database.
+   </para>
 
-  <para>
-   <command>TRUNCATE</> is transaction-safe, however: the truncation
-   will roll back if the surrounding transaction does not commit.
-  </para>
+   <para>
+    <command>TRUNCATE</> is transaction-safe, however: the truncation
+    will be safely rolled back if the surrounding transaction does not
+    commit.
+   </para>
+  </warning>
  </refsect1>
 
  <refsect1>
@@ -124,13 +127,13 @@ TRUNCATE [ TABLE ] <replaceable class="PARAMETER">name</replaceable> [, ...] [ C
    Truncate the tables <literal>bigtable</literal> and <literal>fattable</literal>:
 
 <programlisting>
-TRUNCATE TABLE bigtable, fattable;
+TRUNCATE bigtable, fattable;
 </programlisting>
   </para>
 
   <para>
    Truncate the table <literal>othertable</literal>, and cascade to any tables
-   that are referencing <literal>othertable</literal> via foreign-key
+   that reference <literal>othertable</literal> via foreign-key
    constraints:
 
 <programlisting>