Minor improvement for inval.c header comment

Started by Amit Langotealmost 9 years ago3 messages
#1Amit Langote
Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp
1 attachment(s)

Attached patch modifies a sentence in the inval.c header comment to
mention that operations on a pg_index tuple also registers relcache flush
operation.

Thanks,
Amit

Attachments:

inval-minor-comment-improv.patchtext/x-diff; name=inval-minor-comment-improv.patchDownload
diff --git a/src/backend/utils/cache/inval.c b/src/backend/utils/cache/inval.c
index 8159ab340d..9d62544554 100644
--- a/src/backend/utils/cache/inval.c
+++ b/src/backend/utils/cache/inval.c
@@ -51,9 +51,9 @@
  *	PrepareToInvalidateCacheTuple() routine provides the knowledge of which
  *	catcaches may need invalidation for a given tuple.
  *
- *	Also, whenever we see an operation on a pg_class or pg_attribute tuple,
- *	we register a relcache flush operation for the relation described by that
- *	tuple.
+ *	Also, whenever we see an operation on a pg_class, pg_attribute, or
+ *	pg_index tuple, we register a relcache flush operation for the relation
+ *	described by that tuple.
  *
  *	We keep the relcache flush requests in lists separate from the catcache
  *	tuple flush requests.  This allows us to issue all the pending catcache
#2Simon Riggs
simon@2ndquadrant.com
In reply to: Amit Langote (#1)
Re: Minor improvement for inval.c header comment

On 13 April 2017 at 09:27, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:

Attached patch modifies a sentence in the inval.c header comment to
mention that operations on a pg_index tuple also registers relcache flush
operation.

Correctly observed. Patch pushed.

--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

#3Amit Langote
Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp
In reply to: Simon Riggs (#2)
Re: Minor improvement for inval.c header comment

On 2017/04/13 18:09, Simon Riggs wrote:

On 13 April 2017 at 09:27, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:

Attached patch modifies a sentence in the inval.c header comment to
mention that operations on a pg_index tuple also registers relcache flush
operation.

Correctly observed. Patch pushed.

Thanks.

Regards,
Amit

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers