Re: Second thoughts on CheckIndexCompatible() vs. operator families
| От | Robert Haas |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Second thoughts on CheckIndexCompatible() vs. operator families |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CA+TgmoahuL6iEWCxQX7xWMx4=7COAbGrH0rUFsxoVqpKtG+XLw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Second thoughts on CheckIndexCompatible() vs. operator families (Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Second thoughts on CheckIndexCompatible() vs. operator families
Re: Second thoughts on CheckIndexCompatible() vs. operator families |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 12:23 AM, Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> wrote:
> New version that repairs a defective test case.
Committed. I don't find this to be particularly good style:
+ for (i = 0; i < old_natts && ret; i++)
+ ret = (!IsPolymorphicType(get_opclass_input_type(classObjectId[i
+ irel->rd_att->attrs[i]->atttypid == typeObjectId[i]);
...but I am not sure whether we have any formal policy against it, so
I just committed it as-is for now. I would have surrounded the loop
with an if (ret) block and written the body of the loop as if
(condition) { ret = false; break; }.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: