| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com>, "D'Arcy J(dot)M(dot) Cain" <darcy(at)druid(dot)net>, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: A minor correction in comment in heaptuple.c |
| Date: | 2014-01-28 17:10:16 |
| Message-ID: | 20140128171016.GI20898@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 11:20:39AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > On 2014-01-28 11:14:49 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >> OK, so does anyone object to removing this comment line?
>
> > Let's just not do anything. This is change for changes sake. Not
> > improving anything the slightest.
>
> Indeed. I'd actually request that you revert your previous change to the
> comment, as it didn't improve matters and is only likely to cause pain for
> future back-patching.
OK, so we have a don't change anything and a revert. I am thinking the
new wording as a super-minor improvement. Anyone else want to vote?
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ Everyone has their own god. +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2014-01-28 17:15:28 | Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2014-01-28 17:01:17 | Re: Performance Improvement by reducing WAL for Update Operation |