[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       pgsql-hackers
Subject:    Re: [HACKERS] Minor comment edits in nodeGather.c
From:       Robert Haas <robertmhaas () gmail ! com>
Date:       2015-11-30 18:06:02
Message-ID: CA+TgmobpRNq9X=PTnUF6iicN2k1dqDRRVwG8cEgK=tpACs12Xw () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 9:43 PM, Amit Langote
<Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> On 2015/11/25 11:31, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 1:06 AM, Amit Langote
>> <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
>>> While going through nodeGather.c, I noticed portions of the file header
>>> comment that may have been obsoleted by recent revisions of the relevant
>>> parellelism code. For example, there is a reference to PartialSeqScan node
>>> which did not make it into the tree. Attached fixes it. Also, wondering if
>>> the semantics of Gather node is that of Scan or more generic Plan? That is
>>> to ask whether the following edit makes sense:
>>>
>>>   * nodeGather.c
>>> - *       Support routines for scanning a plan via multiple workers.
>>> + *       Support routines for getting the result from a plan via multiple
>>> + *       workers.
>>>   *
>>
>> Well I think "scanning a plan" is clear enough even if it's
>> technically a Scan.
>
> Okay, ripped that out in the attached.

Committed, thanks.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]