On Sat, Dec 30, 2023 at 08:39:47PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 29.12.23 06:14, Julien Rouhaud wrote: >> I agree with Michael on this one, the only times I saw this pattern >> was to comply with some company internal policy for minimal coverage >> numbers. > > Ok, skipped that.
Just to close the loop here. I thought that I had sent a patch on the lists that made use of these markers, but it looks like that's not the case. The only thread I've found is this one: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/d8f6bdd536df403b9b33816e9f7e0b9d@G08CNEXMBPEKD05.g08.fujitsu.local (FWIW, I'm still skeptic about the idea of painting more backend code with these outside the parsing areas, but I'm OK to be outnumbered.) -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
