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
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-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

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

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

Browse pgsql-patches by date

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