Re: Obsolete comment in pg_stat_statements - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Julien Rouhaud
Subject Re: Obsolete comment in pg_stat_statements
Date
Msg-id CAOBaU_bRUu3uoEzLPuQNfh5oks-fxByV_YFCvfmxa6H6s8nrQA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Obsolete comment in pg_stat_statements  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sat, 14 Sept 2024, 23:44 Tom Lane, <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sat, 14 Sept 2024, 12:39 Tom Lane, <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> 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 I agree that para is out of date, but is there anything to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.

After sleeping on it I looked again, and I think you're right,
there's no useful knowledge remaining in this para.  Pushed.

thanks!

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tomas Vondra
Date:
Subject: Re: Why don't we consider explicit Incremental Sort?
Next
From: Wolfgang Walther
Date:
Subject: Re: Regression tests fail with tzdata 2024b