Re: [HACKERS] Another bug in pg_operator.h
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Another bug in pg_operator.h |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3771.909639391@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Another bug in pg_operator.h (dg@informix.com (David Gould)) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Another bug in pg_operator.h
Re: [HACKERS] Another bug in pg_operator.h |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
dg@informix.com (David Gould) writes: > Also, it lets the planner generate > better plans. If there is a negator or commutator it can use it > instead of generating extra steps. Well, I did *not* go looking for links that should be there and weren't (except in the very special case that the reverse link existed). I just tried to sanity-check the existing links. I agree that it would be nice to look for missing links that should be added ... but that is a performance enhancement, not a bug fix, so I am not eager to do it this close to release. We should do another pass over this table after 6.4 is out the door. (Another reason I didn't try to do that is that I've got no good idea how to find missing links, short of brain-numbingly tedious hand examination. Can you suggest any automated way of finding missing links, or at least finding likely things to look at?) regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: