Re: obsolete reference to a SubPlan field - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: obsolete reference to a SubPlan field
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoYpVJe6Uv8Bcksje9OSZOwjkBTpCPvX1diyq-6Xv9vp+A@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to obsolete reference to a SubPlan field  (Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: obsolete reference to a SubPlan field  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Feb 2, 2022 at 3:08 AM Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> wrote:
> I noticed $subject while looking at something involving SubLinks and
> SubPlans.  It seems eab6b8b27eb removed the "plan" field from the
> SubPlan node struct definition, but the following line from
> expression_tree_mutator():
>
>                 /* but not the sub-Plan itself, which is referenced as-is */
>
> and the following from expression_tree_walker():
>
>                /* recurse into the testexpr, but not into the Plan */
>
> both of which I think refer to that no-longer-existent field, appear
> to have survived multiple commits that moved the SubPlan expression
> processing code around.
>
> Attached patch removes those.

Looks right to me. Tom, any comments?

-- 
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: refactoring basebackup.c (zstd workers)
Next
From: Nathan Bossart
Date:
Subject: Re: Estimating HugePages Requirements?