Re: Misleading comment in pg_upgrade.c

From: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
To: Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Misleading comment in pg_upgrade.c
Date: 2019-12-05 22:45:09
Message-ID: 5398147A-FE25-4844-8750-D47A804816F2@yesql.se
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> On 5 Dec 2019, at 10:17, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> While reading pg_upgrade code to restore the objects on the new
> cluster, I noticed that 5b570d771b8 didn't adjust the database name in
> the comments explaining the requirements for an extra "--clean" for
> template1 and postgres databases. While it's true that both databases
> will already exist, I found it confusing to mention both names when
> only one is processed for each code path.

Agreed, I think this reads better.

cheers ./daniel

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2019-12-05 23:15:50 Re: log bind parameter values on error
Previous Message Daniel Gustafsson 2019-12-05 22:29:36 Re: Update minimum SSL version