Fix typo in MVCC test comment

The optimization is named kill_prior_tuple but was accidentally
spelled kill_prio_tuple in the test.

Author: Mingli Zhang <[email protected]>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/82d3e66a-d8ae-4bfa-943e-29c5add0743f@Spark

diff --git a/src/test/regress/expected/mvcc.out b/src/test/regress/expected/mvcc.out
index 16ed4ddf2d8c027773545c9755516c3d2399b89b..225c39f64f826aa1a3734fc9afce73eaacd5617f 100644 (file)
--- a/src/test/regress/expected/mvcc.out
+++ b/src/test/regress/expected/mvcc.out
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 --
 -- Verify that index scans encountering dead rows produced by an
 -- aborted subtransaction of the current transaction can utilize the
--- kill_prio_tuple optimization
+-- kill_prior_tuple optimization
 --
 -- NB: The table size is currently *not* expected to stay the same, we
 -- don't have logic to trigger opportunistic pruning in cases like

diff --git a/src/test/regress/sql/mvcc.sql b/src/test/regress/sql/mvcc.sql
index b22a86dc5e514cb94de08ec6d60bc5882b03fd98..0a3ebc88f34e7eb6a3e0247cca9226f84f574a92 100644 (file)
--- a/src/test/regress/sql/mvcc.sql
+++ b/src/test/regress/sql/mvcc.sql
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 --
 -- Verify that index scans encountering dead rows produced by an
 -- aborted subtransaction of the current transaction can utilize the
--- kill_prio_tuple optimization
+-- kill_prior_tuple optimization
 --
 -- NB: The table size is currently *not* expected to stay the same, we
 -- don't have logic to trigger opportunistic pruning in cases like