| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com>, "D'Arcy J(dot)M(dot) Cain" <darcy(at)druid(dot)net>, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: A minor correction in comment in heaptuple.c |
| Date: | 2014-01-25 21:56:37 |
| Message-ID: | 9788.1390686997@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 10:40:28PM +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
>> I think this style of pinhole copy editing is pretty pointless. There's
>> dozen checks just like this around. If somebody wants to change the rules
>> or improve comment it takes more than picking a random one.
> OK, change made.
FWIW, I don't find that an improvement either. As Andres says, this
is just applying the same rule that's used in many other places, ie
return null if the requested attnum is off the end of the tuple.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2014-01-25 22:02:21 | Re: A better way than tweaking NTUP_PER_BUCKET |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2014-01-25 21:54:12 | Re: A better way than tweaking NTUP_PER_BUCKET |