Re: Obsolete comment in pg_stat_statements

From: Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Obsolete comment in pg_stat_statements
Date: 2024-09-15 02:30:02
Message-ID: CAOBaU_bRUu3uoEzLPuQNfh5oks-fxByV_YFCvfmxa6H6s8nrQA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, 14 Sept 2024, 23:44 Tom Lane, <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > On Sat, 14 Sept 2024, 12:39 Tom Lane, <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> >> Hmm ... I agree that para is out of date, but is there anything to
> >> salvage rather than just delete it?
>
> > I thought about it but I think that now that knowledge is in the else
> > branch, with the mention that we still have to bump the nesting level
> even
> > if it's not locally handled.
>
> After sleeping on it I looked again, and I think you're right,
> there's no useful knowledge remaining in this para. Pushed.

thanks!

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Wolfgang Walther 2024-09-15 09:08:11 Re: Regression tests fail with tzdata 2024b
Previous Message Florents Tselai 2024-09-15 01:15:12 [PATCH] WIP: replace method for jsonpath