On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 8:46 AM John Naylor
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 8, 2021 at 10:50 PM Michael Paquier
wrote:
> >
> > At first glance, this looked to me like breaking something just for
> > sake of breaking it, but removing the rel argument could be helpful
> > to simplify any external code calli
On Tue, Jun 8, 2021 at 10:50 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> At first glance, this looked to me like breaking something just for
> sake of breaking it, but removing the rel argument could be helpful
> to simplify any external code calling it as there would be no need for
> this extra Relation. So t
> Marking this as ready for committer. It can be committed when the branch
> is cut for 15.
I see that REL_14_STABLE is already cut. So this can go in now.
Hello,
Googling around, I didn't find any extensions that would break from this
change. Even if there are any, this change will simplify the relevant
callsites. It also aligns the interface nicely with get_qual_for_hash,
get_qual_for_list and get_qual_for_range.
Marking this as ready for committe
On Wed, Jun 09, 2021 at 12:28:48AM +, houzj.f...@fujitsu.com wrote:
> OK, Thanks for the explanation.
> Added to CF: https://commitfest.postgresql.org/33/3159/
At first glance, this looked to me like breaking something just for
sake of breaking it, but removing the rel argument could be helpfu
On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 7:30 PM David Rowley
> On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 at 21:50, houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> > I noticed that the first function parameter in
> > get_qual_from_partbound(**Relation rel**, Relation parent, is not used in
> > the
> function.
> >
> > Is it better to remove it like
On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 at 21:50, houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
> I noticed that the first function parameter in
> get_qual_from_partbound(**Relation rel**, Relation parent,
> is not used in the function.
>
> Is it better to remove it like the attached patch ?
Going by [1] it was used when it went in
