Re: Fix a wrong comment in setrefs.c
От | Heikki Linnakangas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Fix a wrong comment in setrefs.c |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 52b2ec31-b39b-495e-b043-a4a99ccfb3e5@iki.fi обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Fix a wrong comment in setrefs.c (Richard Guo <guofenglinux@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Fix a wrong comment in setrefs.c
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 03/11/2023 08:10, Richard Guo wrote: > On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 9:51 AM Richard Guo <guofenglinux@gmail.com > <mailto:guofenglinux@gmail.com>> wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 5:45 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us > <mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>> wrote: > > I'm inclined to write the comment more like "Usually the equal() > check is redundant, but in setop plans it may not be, since > prepunion.c assigns ressortgroupref equal to the column resno > without regard to whether that matches the topmost level's > sortgrouprefs and without regard to whether any implicit coercions > are added in the setop tree. We might have to clean that up > someday; > but for now, just ignore any false matches." > > > +1. It explains the situation much more clearly and accurately. > > To make it easier to review, I've updated the patch to be so. Committed, thanks! -- Heikki Linnakangas Neon (https://neon.tech)
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: