From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: free space % calculation in pgstathashindex |
Date: | 2017-08-08 09:00:51 |
Message-ID: | CAA4eK1LNPGi6pa6x0zfXakQ97i0y+dvUgacfG=LPwUFJNB98mg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 9:38 PM, Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 7:19 PM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 6:07 PM, Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>> ..
..
>> Why an extra parenthesis in above case whereas not in below case? I
>> think the code will look consistent if you follow the same coding
>> practice. I suggest don't use it unless you need it.
>
> That is because in the 1st case, there are multiple operators (*, +)
> whereas in the 2nd case we have just one(*). So, just to ensure that
> '*' is performed before '+', i had used parenthesis, though it is not
> required as '*' has higher precedence than '+'. I have removed the
> extra parenthesis and attached is the new version of patch. Thanks.
>
Your latest patch looks good to me.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2017-08-08 09:58:54 | Re: Subscription code improvements |
Previous Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2017-08-08 08:51:02 | Re: Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively) partitioned tables |