Re: distinct estimate of a hard-coded VALUES list

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: distinct estimate of a hard-coded VALUES list
Date: 2017-08-16 19:40:50
Message-ID: 24184.1502912450@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> This patch still applies, and I think the argument for it is still valid.
> So I'm going to make a commit-fest entry for it. Is there additional
> evidence we should gather?

I think we had consensus to apply this at the start of the next
development cycle; I just forgot to do it for v10. Hence, pushed
into v11.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2017-08-16 19:43:09 Re: Atomics for heap_parallelscan_nextpage()
Previous Message Andres Freund 2017-08-16 19:13:46 Re: Atomics for heap_parallelscan_nextpage()