Fix typo in MVCC test comment

danielgustafsson · danielgustafsson · commit 0c67e9e566db · 2022-08-25T10:31:20.000+02:00
The optimization is named kill_prior_tuple but was accidentally spelled kill_prio_tuple in the test. Author: Mingli Zhang <avamingli@gmail.com> 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
@@ -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
@@ -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
