Thread

Commits

  1. Remove unnecessary resetPQExpBuffer call

  1. Unnecessary call to resetPQExpBuffer in getIndexes

    Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com> — 2022-02-09T02:50:07Z

    Hi,
    
    I just noticed that e2c52beecd (adding PeterE in Cc) added a resetPQExpBuffer()
    which seems unnecessary since the variable is untouched since the initial
    createPQExpBuffer().
    
    Simple patch attached.
    
  2. Re: Unnecessary call to resetPQExpBuffer in getIndexes

    Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> — 2022-02-09T18:21:10Z

    On Wed, Feb 09, 2022 at 10:50:07AM +0800, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
    > I just noticed that e2c52beecd (adding PeterE in Cc) added a resetPQExpBuffer()
    > which seems unnecessary since the variable is untouched since the initial
    > createPQExpBuffer().
    > 
    > Simple patch attached.
    
    LGTM
    
    -- 
    Nathan Bossart
    Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
    
    
    
    
  3. Re: Unnecessary call to resetPQExpBuffer in getIndexes

    Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com> — 2022-02-10T11:25:36Z

    On 09.02.22 19:21, Nathan Bossart wrote:
    > On Wed, Feb 09, 2022 at 10:50:07AM +0800, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
    >> I just noticed that e2c52beecd (adding PeterE in Cc) added a resetPQExpBuffer()
    >> which seems unnecessary since the variable is untouched since the initial
    >> createPQExpBuffer().
    >>
    >> Simple patch attached.
    > 
    > LGTM
    
    committed
    
    
    
    
  4. Re: Unnecessary call to resetPQExpBuffer in getIndexes

    Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com> — 2022-02-10T11:53:15Z

    On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 12:25:36PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
    > On 09.02.22 19:21, Nathan Bossart wrote:
    > > On Wed, Feb 09, 2022 at 10:50:07AM +0800, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
    > > > I just noticed that e2c52beecd (adding PeterE in Cc) added a resetPQExpBuffer()
    > > > which seems unnecessary since the variable is untouched since the initial
    > > > createPQExpBuffer().
    > > > 
    > > > Simple patch attached.
    > > 
    > > LGTM
    > 
    > committed
    
    Thanks!