Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Kapila
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum
Date
Msg-id CAA4eK1J3_wBtC=9swQYmyKhRJf_j-1pu2et565QpVa89yjQR3A@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum  (Mahendra Singh <mahi6run@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Dec 23, 2019 at 11:02 PM Mahendra Singh <mahi6run@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 5. I am not sure that I am right but I can see that we are not consistent while ending the single line comments.
>
> I think, if single line comment is started with "upper case letter", then we should not put period(dot) at the end of
comment,but if comment started with "lower case letter", then we should put period(dot) at the end of comment.
 
>
> a)
> + /* parallel vacuum must be active */
> I think. we should end above comment with dot or we should make "p" of parallel as upper case letter.
>
> b)
> + /* At least count itself */
> I think, above is correct.
>

I have checked a few files in this context and I don't see any
consistency, so I would suggest keeping the things matching with the
nearby code.  Do you have any reason for the above conclusion?


-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Masahiko Sawada
Date:
Subject: Re: Online checksums verification in the backend
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: error context for vacuum to include block number