On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 3:27 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> 0001 below does this. I found a couple of places that could use
> forfive(), as well. I think this is a clear legibility and
> error-proofing win, and we should just push it.
It sounds like some of these places might need a bigger restructuring
- i.e. to iterate over a list/vector of structs with 5 members instead
of iterating over five lists in parallel.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company