Re: Update some comments for fasthash

From: John Naylor <johncnaylorls(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: zengman <zengman(at)halodbtech(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Update some comments for fasthash
Date: 2026-01-21 07:13:59
Message-ID: CANWCAZbxhniuH_11=nq0AV3iBfN8CPtxYN4Tkb+N8O367H0P0w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Jan 14, 2026 at 5:09 PM zengman <zengman(at)halodbtech(dot)com> wrote:
> I noticed that "hashcode code" in the patch seems a bit redundant — it might be worth adjusting this part.
> ```
> - * interface. Returns the same 64-bit hashcode code as the original,
> + * interface. Returns the same 64-bit hashcode as the original,
> ```

Pushed, with that correction, thanks for looking!

--
John Naylor
Amazon Web Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dilip Kumar 2026-01-21 07:21:15 Re: Skipping schema changes in publication
Previous Message Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) 2026-01-21 07:10:46 RE: Assert the timestamp is available for ORIGN_DIFFERS conflicts