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: 2024-09-14 04:56:05
Message-ID: CAOBaU_bT7yU7sLHMhf+PSaV9W+q9Lp6OUfCXFRCdQ2jPf0bJmw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, 14 Sept 2024, 12:39 Tom Lane, <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > While adapting in pg_stat_kcache the fix for buggy nesting level
> calculation, I
> > noticed that one comment referencing the old approach was missed.
> Trivial
> > patch attached.
>
> 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 I agree that para is out of date, but is there anything to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.

>
>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tatsuo Ishii 2024-09-14 08:12:01 Re: Add memory/disk usage for WindowAgg nodes in EXPLAIN
Previous Message Tom Lane 2024-09-14 04:39:04 Re: Obsolete comment in pg_stat_statements