Re: Generating code for query jumbling through gen_node_support.pl

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, "Drouvot, Bertrand" <bdrouvot(at)amazon(dot)com>, "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Generating code for query jumbling through gen_node_support.pl
Date: 2023-07-19 03:30:57
Message-ID: ZLdY8XVPNQt4NNDq@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jul 11, 2023 at 07:35:43AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> I still don't think that we need both methods based on these numbers,
> but there may be more opinions about that? Are people OK if this open
> item is discarded?

Hearing nothing about this point, removed from the open item list,
then.
--
Michael

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2023-07-19 03:31:34 Re: logicalrep_message_type throws an error
Previous Message Tom Lane 2023-07-19 03:10:22 Re: FATAL: operator class "xxxx" does not exist for access method "btree"