Re: Incorrect comment in get_partition_dispatch_recurse
От | David Rowley |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Incorrect comment in get_partition_dispatch_recurse |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAKJS1f_VwEYVOb_iNwjUbGPjEYKrtXoHkBnwNbw6ZQ506UCRyg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Incorrect comment in get_partition_dispatch_recurse (Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 17 May 2018 at 13:17, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote: > Or maybe, change the comment to say that even the negative indexes are > 0-based like you pointed out, *but* instead of updating the comment like > you suggest above, change the other index value assignment statement to > not subtract 1 from the list_length by switching order with the > accompanying lappend; like this: > > if (get_rel_relkind(partrelid) != RELKIND_PARTITIONED_TABLE) > { > + pd->indexes[i] = list_length(*leaf_part_oids); > *leaf_part_oids = lappend_oid(*leaf_part_oids, partrelid); > - pd->indexes[i] = list_length(*leaf_part_oids) - 1; > } > else > { That makes sense. It's probably less confusing that way. -- David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: