On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 1:17 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> It seems a little weird to make the join-type test be the first one
> in the if() condition: it doesn't seem like the most important thing
> to test, and it doesn't agree with the way you've worded the comment.
> Otherwise +1.
Thanks for the fast review. Updated. I'll default to waiting until
after I see the tags for the release that's in progress unless you
think it should be included.
--
Thomas Munro
https://enterprisedb.com
