Re: Obsolete reference to pg_relation in comment

From: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker <ilmari(at)ilmari(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Obsolete reference to pg_relation in comment
Date: 2023-09-07 08:44:25
Message-ID: C7D6C832-23B2-4550-8D6B-7D09B525141A@yesql.se
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> On 6 Sep 2023, at 21:13, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 05:14:08PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:

>> I think we should reword this to just generically claim that holding
>> the Relation reference open for the whole transaction reduces overhead.
>
> How is this attached patch?

Reads good to me, +1.

--
Daniel Gustafsson

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Daniel Gustafsson 2023-09-07 08:57:52 Re: psql - pager support - using invisible chars for signalling end of report
Previous Message Christoph Berg 2023-09-07 08:19:41 Re: A failure in 031_recovery_conflict.pl on Debian/s390x