Re: slight tweaks to documentation about runtime pruning

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: slight tweaks to documentation about runtime pruning
Date: 2018-12-17 14:49:01
Message-ID: 20181217144901.tpugtueigoddwevh@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2018-Dec-14, Amit Langote wrote:

> I updated the patch. Regarding whether we should mention "(never
> executed)", it wouldn't hurt to mention it imho, exactly because it's
> shown in the place of showing loops=0. How about the attached?

Pushed, thanks.

--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Corey Huinker 2018-12-17 14:56:44 Statement-level Triggers For Uniqueness Checks
Previous Message Vijaykumar Jain 2018-12-17 14:32:42 Re: [External] Re: simple query on why a merge join plan got selected