On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 7:30 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote:
>
> On 2021-Jul-09, Amul Sul wrote:
>
> > > On Tue, Jul 6, 2021 at 11:06 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> > > > The point of the static-inline function idea was to be cheap enough
> > > > that it isn't worth worrying about this sort of risky optimization.
> > > > Given that an smgr function is sure to involve some kernel calls,
> > > > I doubt it's worth sweating over an extra test-and-branch beforehand.
> > > > So where I was hoping to get to is that smgr objects are *only*
> > > > referenced by RelationGetSmgr() calls and nobody ever keeps any
> > > > other pointers to them across any non-smgr operations.
>
> > Herewith attached version did the same, thanks.
>
> I think it would be valuable to have a comment in that function to point
> out what is the function there for.
Thanks for the suggestion, added the same in the attached version.
Regards,
Amul
