1
0
mirror of https://github.com/postgres/postgres.git synced 2025-07-05 07:21:24 +03:00

Run pgindent on 9.2 source tree in preparation for first 9.3

commit-fest.
This commit is contained in:
Bruce Momjian
2012-06-10 15:20:04 -04:00
parent 60801944fa
commit 927d61eeff
494 changed files with 7343 additions and 7046 deletions

View File

@ -86,7 +86,7 @@ IndexOnlyNext(IndexOnlyScanState *node)
* Note on Memory Ordering Effects: visibilitymap_test does not lock
* the visibility map buffer, and therefore the result we read here
* could be slightly stale. However, it can't be stale enough to
* matter. It suffices to show that (1) there is a read barrier
* matter. It suffices to show that (1) there is a read barrier
* between the time we read the index TID and the time we test the
* visibility map; and (2) there is a write barrier between the time
* some other concurrent process clears the visibility map bit and the
@ -106,12 +106,12 @@ IndexOnlyNext(IndexOnlyScanState *node)
node->ioss_HeapFetches++;
tuple = index_fetch_heap(scandesc);
if (tuple == NULL)
continue; /* no visible tuple, try next index entry */
continue; /* no visible tuple, try next index entry */
/*
* Only MVCC snapshots are supported here, so there should be no
* need to keep following the HOT chain once a visible entry has
* been found. If we did want to allow that, we'd need to keep
* been found. If we did want to allow that, we'd need to keep
* more state to remember not to call index_getnext_tid next time.
*/
if (scandesc->xs_continue_hot)
@ -120,7 +120,7 @@ IndexOnlyNext(IndexOnlyScanState *node)
/*
* Note: at this point we are holding a pin on the heap page, as
* recorded in scandesc->xs_cbuf. We could release that pin now,
* but it's not clear whether it's a win to do so. The next index
* but it's not clear whether it's a win to do so. The next index
* entry might require a visit to the same heap page.
*/
}
@ -176,8 +176,8 @@ StoreIndexTuple(TupleTableSlot *slot, IndexTuple itup, TupleDesc itupdesc)
* Note: we must use the tupdesc supplied by the AM in index_getattr, not
* the slot's tupdesc, in case the latter has different datatypes (this
* happens for btree name_ops in particular). They'd better have the same
* number of columns though, as well as being datatype-compatible which
* is something we can't so easily check.
* number of columns though, as well as being datatype-compatible which is
* something we can't so easily check.
*/
Assert(slot->tts_tupleDescriptor->natts == nindexatts);
@ -494,10 +494,10 @@ ExecInitIndexOnlyScan(IndexOnlyScan *node, EState *estate, int eflags)
* Initialize scan descriptor.
*/
indexstate->ioss_ScanDesc = index_beginscan(currentRelation,
indexstate->ioss_RelationDesc,
estate->es_snapshot,
indexstate->ioss_NumScanKeys,
indexstate->ioss_NumOrderByKeys);
indexstate->ioss_RelationDesc,
estate->es_snapshot,
indexstate->ioss_NumScanKeys,
indexstate->ioss_NumOrderByKeys);
/* Set it up for index-only scan */
indexstate->ioss_ScanDesc->xs_want_itup = true;