From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Etsuro Fujita <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Minor comment update in setrefs.c |
Date: | 2015-12-10 17:21:59 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmobWiQ6sr9jnLkHCSOwYemLsnSWQhWQvDrWxETY2qcExxA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 6:16 AM, Etsuro Fujita
<fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
> Attached is a small patch to adjust a comment in setrefs.c; in
> set_foreignscan_references, fdw_recheck_quals also gets adjusted to
> reference foreign scan tuple, in case of a foreign join, so I added
> "etc.", to a comment there, as the comment in case of a simple foreign
> table scan.
Doesn't apply any more. I suppose we could sync up the similar
comments in set_customscan_references() too. But to be honest I'm not
sure this is adding any clarity. "etc." may not be the least
informative thing you can put in a comment, but it's pretty close.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2015-12-10 17:36:32 | Re: Error with index on unlogged table |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2015-12-10 17:19:12 | Re: Error with index on unlogged table |