| From: | Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | assam258(at)gmail(dot)com, jian(dot)universality(at)gmail(dot)com |
| Cc: | zsolt(dot)parragi(at)percona(dot)com, sjjang112233(at)gmail(dot)com, vik(at)postgresfriends(dot)org, er(at)xs4all(dot)nl, jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com, david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com, peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org, li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Row pattern recognition |
| Date: | 2026-09-12 02:10:59 |
| Message-ID: | 20260912.111059.1351500388258260806.ishii@postgresql.org |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Henson,
Hi Jian,
Since v51 "pg_nodiscard" has been introduced in the RPR patches for
some static functions. Are these "pg_nodiscard" really necessary? I
know that PostgreSQL already uses pg_nodiscard for some list functions
and memory allocation functions etc. but there's no single instance of
pg_nodiscard being used for static functions. I guess the reason is
that because function declarations are in the same file as the
callers, there's very small chance to mistakenly ignore the function's
return value.
Regards,
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS K.K.
English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en/
Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Xuneng Zhou | 2026-09-12 02:48:06 | Re: Reject WAIT FOR earlier in transaction-snapshot mode |
| Previous Message | ZizhuanLiu X-MAN | 2026-09-12 01:54:56 | Re: Fix var_eq_const: sum selectivity of all matching MCV entries instead of stopping at first match |