Re: Fix a wrong comment in setrefs.c

On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 9:51 AM Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 5:45 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
>> I'm inclined to write the comment more like "Usually the equal()
>> check is redundant, but in setop plans it may not be, since
>> prepunion.c assigns ressortgroupref equal to the column resno
>> without regard to whether that matches the topmost level's
>> sortgrouprefs and without regard to whether any implicit coercions
>> are added in the setop tree. We might have to clean that up someday;
>> but for now, just ignore any false matches."
>
>
> +1. It explains the situation much more clearly and accurately.
>

To make it easier to review, I've updated the patch to be so.

Thanks
Richard