| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: RangeTblEntry.inh vs. RTE_SUBQUERY |
| Date: | 2024-02-29 19:47:12 |
| Message-ID: | 2728763.1709236032@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> writes:
> On 2024-Feb-29, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I agree that perminfoindex seems to have suffered from add-at-the-end
>> syndrome, and if we do touch the field order you made an improvement
>> there. (BTW, who thought they needn't bother with a comment for
>> perminfoindex?)
> There is a comment for it, or at least a61b1f74823c added one, though
> not immediately adjacent. I do see that it's now further away than it
> was. Perhaps we could add /* index of RTEPermissionInfo entry, or 0 */
> to the line.
That'd be enough for me.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2024-02-29 19:49:29 | Re: MERGE ... RETURNING |
| Previous Message | Dean Rasheed | 2024-02-29 19:24:21 | Re: MERGE ... RETURNING |