| From: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ranier Vilela <ranier(dot)vf(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Possible api miuse bms_next_member |
| Date: | 2025-04-10 05:57:04 |
| Message-ID: | CAApHDvpp1AczfpRToawJ1xNoExtFXQbfpPueOuPtjP5xauRc9Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 at 02:18, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> If we did want to do something about this warning, rather than
> hacking up the call sites I'd be inclined to invent something like
> "bms_first_member()" which does the same thing but additionally
> asserts on empty input. Not really convinced it's worth the
> trouble though.
Aha, a reincarnation! (462bb7f12).
My vote too is to do nothing.
David
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2025-04-10 06:00:16 | Re: BitmapHeapScan streaming read user and prelim refactoring |
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2025-04-10 05:35:22 | Re: [PoC] Reducing planning time when tables have many partitions |