| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com>, "D'Arcy J(dot)M(dot) Cain" <darcy(at)druid(dot)net>, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: A minor correction in comment in heaptuple.c |
| Date: | 2014-01-28 17:42:46 |
| Message-ID: | 20140128174246.GN20898@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 06:30:40PM +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
> > OK, reverted. I have to question how well-balanced we are when a word
> > change in a C comment can cause so much contention.
>
> The question is rather why to do such busywork changes in the first
> place imo. Without ever looking at more than one a few lines up/down
> especially.
I see what you mean that the identical comment appears in the same C
file. :-(
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ Everyone has their own god. +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2014-01-28 17:46:10 | Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2014-01-28 17:42:10 | Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe |