Re: Centralizing protective copying of utility statements

From: Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Centralizing protective copying of utility statements
Date: 2021-06-18 15:15:45
Message-ID: 20210618151545.zamlaguxt4tudyjw@nol
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 10:24:20AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 01:03:29PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > + * readOnlyTree: treat pstmt's node tree as read-only
>
> > Maybe it's because I'm not a native english speaker, or because it's quite
> > late here, but I don't find "treat as read-only" really clear. I don't have a
> > concise better wording to suggest.
>
> Maybe "if true, pstmt's node tree must not be modified" ?

Thanks, I find it way better!

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2021-06-18 15:24:00 Re: Centralizing protective copying of utility statements
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2021-06-18 14:27:50 Re: Add version macro to libpq-fe.h