On Mon, Apr 13, 2026 at 6:32 AM Peter Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 10, 2026 at 11:10 PM Robert Treat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Apr 9, 2026 at 9:05 PM Peter Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Thu, Apr 9, 2026 at 1:34 PM Chao Li <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > I am not sure if your scope includes contrib/, if yes, I am sure you > > > > will find some occurrences there. > > > > > > > > > > Updated one more message found in contrib. > > > > > > PSA v2. > > > > > > > +1 to the general idea here, although at the risk of looking at > > patches before the morning coffee has settled in, ISTM you might have > > missed some entries? And/or this patch isn't against HEAD? For > > example, you seem to be catching the line here > > https://github.com/postgres/postgres/blame/009ea1b08d7b8843435bd0f1137fa3df09aac79f/src/test/regress/expected/partition_split.out#L60, > > but not the one on line 52, maybe because it looks like a comment (but > > istm we should clean these all up. no?) > > > > Thanks for your review! > > Yes, the patch applies to HEAD. It looks like I was a bit slack in > updating some test comments. Hopefully, I have found them all now. >
BTW, I find such a code cleanup exercise can be done even after feature freeze. If so, shall we do it as a HEAD-only patch or do it in bank branches as well? -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
