Re: Get more from indices.

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp, robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Get more from indices.
Date: 2014-04-18 13:43:27
Message-ID: 22533.1397828607@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> Ok, I am convinced that your suggestion - truncating
> query_pathkeys by removing eventually no-op entries - seems
> preferable and will have wider effect naturally - more promised.

> I won't persist with the way this patch currently does but the
> new patch of course can't come up within this CF. I will agree if
> you decide to make this patch 'Returned with Feedback'. (I feel a
> little sad for 'Rejected' but you can justly do that if you think
> that the patch comming up next is utterly different from this
> one:()

I marked it as "returned with feedback".

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2014-04-18 14:44:55 Re: assertion in 9.4 with wal_level=logical
Previous Message MauMau 2014-04-18 13:09:12 Re: How can we make beta testing better?