Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Dead code in _bt_split?

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Dead code in _bt_split?
Date: 2007-02-03 23:58:14
Message-ID: 200702032358.l13NwEr25635@momjian.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
Heikki, did this code cleanup get included in your recent btree split
fix?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tom Lane wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> > In that case, newitemleft would be false, right?
> > I'm saying the piece marked with X> below is unreachable:
> 
> Oh, I see.  Hmm ... probably so, I think that chunk of code was just
> copied and pasted from where it occurs within the loop.
> 
> 			regards, tom lane
> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend

-- 
  Bruce Momjian   bruce(at)momjian(dot)us
  EnterpriseDB    http://www.enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Jan WieckDate: 2007-02-04 01:02:26
Subject: Re: Proposal: Change of pg_trigger.tg_enabled and adding
Previous:From: Jeremy DrakeDate: 2007-02-03 23:51:38
Subject: SRF optimization question

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2007-02-04 00:00:01
Subject: Re: Index split WAL reduction
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2007-02-03 23:46:56
Subject: Re: date comparisons

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group