On 2017/06/15 17:53, Ashutosh Bapat wrote: > On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 2:12 PM, Amit Langote wrote: >>> Both of the above comments are not related to the bug that is being fixed, >>> but >>> they apply to the same code where the bug exists. So instead of fixing it >>> twice, may be we should expand the scope of this work to cover other >>> refactoring needed in this area. That might save us some rebasing and >>> commits. >> >> Are you saying that the patch posted on that thread should be brought over >> and discussed here? > > Not the whole patch, but that one particular comment, which applies to > the existing code in ATExecAttachPartition(). If we fix the existing > code in ATExecAttachPartition(), the refactoring patch there will > inherit it when rebased.
Yes, I too meant only the refactoring patch, which I see as patch 0001 in the series of patches that Jeevan posted with the following message: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAOgcT0NeR%3D%2BTMRTw6oq_5WrJF%2B_xG91k_nGUub29Lnv5-qmQHw%40mail.gmail.com Thanks, Amit -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
