Obsolete comment in pg_stat_statements
Hi,
(adding TOm in Cc as committer/co-author of the original patch)
While adapting in pg_stat_kcache the fix for buggy nesting level calculation, I
noticed that one comment referencing the old approach was missed. Trivial
patch attached.
Attachments:
v1-0001-Remove-obsolete-comment-in-pg_stat_statements.patchtext/plain; charset=us-asciiDownload+0-8
Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com> writes:
While adapting in pg_stat_kcache the fix for buggy nesting level calculation, I
noticed that one comment referencing the old approach was missed. Trivial
patch attached.
Hmm ... I agree that para is out of date, but is there anything to
salvage rather than just delete it?
regards, tom lane
On Sat, 14 Sept 2024, 12:39 Tom Lane, <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com> writes:
While adapting in pg_stat_kcache the fix for buggy nesting level
calculation, I
noticed that one comment referencing the old approach was missed.
Trivial
patch attached.
Hmm ... I agree that para is out of date, but is there anything to
salvage rather than just delete it?
I thought about it but I think that now that knowledge is in the else
branch, with the mention that we still have to bump the nesting level even
if it's not locally handled.
Show quoted text
Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sept 2024, 12:39 Tom Lane, <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Hmm ... I agree that para is out of date, but is there anything to
salvage rather than just delete it?
I thought about it but I think that now that knowledge is in the else
branch, with the mention that we still have to bump the nesting level even
if it's not locally handled.
After sleeping on it I looked again, and I think you're right,
there's no useful knowledge remaining in this para. Pushed.
regards, tom lane
On Sat, 14 Sept 2024, 23:44 Tom Lane, <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sept 2024, 12:39 Tom Lane, <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Hmm ... I agree that para is out of date, but is there anything to
salvage rather than just delete it?I thought about it but I think that now that knowledge is in the else
branch, with the mention that we still have to bump the nesting leveleven
if it's not locally handled.
After sleeping on it I looked again, and I think you're right,
there's no useful knowledge remaining in this para. Pushed.
thanks!