Another typo in comment in setrefs.c
Hi,
I'm attaching a small patch to fix another comment typo in setrefs.c:
s/TIDs/OIDs/
Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita
Attachments:
setrefs-another-typo.patchtext/x-patch; name=setrefs-another-typo.patchDownload+1-1
* Etsuro Fujita (fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp) wrote:
I'm attaching a small patch to fix another comment typo in setrefs.c:
s/TIDs/OIDs/
Fixed.
Thanks!
Stephen
Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes:
* Etsuro Fujita (fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp) wrote:
I'm attaching a small patch to fix another comment typo in setrefs.c:
s/TIDs/OIDs/
Fixed.
I do not think "typo" is the right characterization. I'm too lazy to
check for sure, but I think what was accumulated was indeed TIDs at one
time. The proposed patch is not correct either: what we accumulate now is
syscache hash values. Might be best to just say "add PlanInvalItems for
user-defined functions", which is the wording used in some other places,
eg line 173.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
* Tom Lane (tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes:
* Etsuro Fujita (fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp) wrote:
I'm attaching a small patch to fix another comment typo in setrefs.c:
s/TIDs/OIDs/Fixed.
I do not think "typo" is the right characterization. I'm too lazy to
check for sure, but I think what was accumulated was indeed TIDs at one
time. The proposed patch is not correct either: what we accumulate now is
syscache hash values. Might be best to just say "add PlanInvalItems for
user-defined functions", which is the wording used in some other places,
eg line 173.
Perhaps it was. I had looked at what was being called (which is
record_plan_function_dependency) and noted that it was taking OIDs and
certainly not TIDs.
I agree that rewording it to refer to PlanInvalItems is better than just
saying OIDs when we're actually looking up the OID and then adding a
PlanInvalItem which includes PROCOID and the syscache hash value.
Attached is a patch with the proposed change (against master, the back
branches require slightly different patches due to nearby wording
changes).
Thanks!
Stephen
Attachments:
setrefs-comment.patchtext/x-diff; charset=us-asciiDownload+1-2
Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes:
Attached is a patch with the proposed change (against master, the back
branches require slightly different patches due to nearby wording
changes).
Already done, after a bit of research into when things actually changed.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
* Tom Lane (tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes:
Attached is a patch with the proposed change (against master, the back
branches require slightly different patches due to nearby wording
changes).Already done, after a bit of research into when things actually changed.
Awesome, thanks!
Stephen
On 2015/09/10 23:31, Stephen Frost wrote:
* Tom Lane (tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes:
Attached is a patch with the proposed change (against master, the back
branches require slightly different patches due to nearby wording
changes).Already done, after a bit of research into when things actually changed.
Awesome, thanks!
Thank you, Stephen and Tom.
Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers