Thread: RelationGetIndexAttrBitmap() small deviation between comment and code

RelationGetIndexAttrBitmap() small deviation between comment and code

From
David Rowley
Date:
(This is pretty minor, but I struggled to ignore it)

In RelationGetIndexAttrBitmap() a comment claims /* We return our
original working copy for caller to play with */. 3 of the 4 possible
Bitmapsets follow that comment but for some reason, we make a copy of
the primary key attrs before returning.  This seems both unnecessary
and also quite out of sync to what all the other Bitmapsets do.   I
don't quite see any reason for doing it so I assume there's none.

The attached removes the bms_copy() and just returns the set that's
already been built in the same memory context.

-- 
 David Rowley                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

Attachment

Re: RelationGetIndexAttrBitmap() small deviation between comment and code

From
Tom Lane
Date:
David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> (This is pretty minor, but I struggled to ignore it)
> In RelationGetIndexAttrBitmap() a comment claims /* We return our
> original working copy for caller to play with */. 3 of the 4 possible
> Bitmapsets follow that comment but for some reason, we make a copy of
> the primary key attrs before returning.  This seems both unnecessary
> and also quite out of sync to what all the other Bitmapsets do.   I
> don't quite see any reason for doing it so I assume there's none.

I agree, that's pretty bogus.  Will push in a minute.

            regards, tom lane


Re: RelationGetIndexAttrBitmap() small deviation between comment and code

From
David Rowley
Date:
On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 at 12:27, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> > (This is pretty minor, but I struggled to ignore it)
> > In RelationGetIndexAttrBitmap() a comment claims /* We return our
> > original working copy for caller to play with */. 3 of the 4 possible
> > Bitmapsets follow that comment but for some reason, we make a copy of
> > the primary key attrs before returning.  This seems both unnecessary
> > and also quite out of sync to what all the other Bitmapsets do.   I
> > don't quite see any reason for doing it so I assume there's none.
>
> I agree, that's pretty bogus.  Will push in a minute.

Thanks.

-- 
 David Rowley                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services