Re: Calculage avg. width when operator = is missing

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: "Shulgin, Oleksandr" <oleksandr(dot)shulgin(at)zalando(dot)de>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Calculage avg. width when operator = is missing
Date: 2015-09-23 22:30:33
Message-ID: 25306.1443047433@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Personally I think Alvaro's position is unduly conservative: to the extent
>> that plans change it'd likely be for the better. But I'm not excited
>> enough to fight hard about it.

> I don't really care enough. We have received some complaints about
> keeping plans stable, but maybe it's okay.

The other side of the coin is that there haven't been so many requests for
changing this; more than just this one, but not a groundswell. So 9.5
only seems like a good compromise unless we get more votes for back-patch.

I reviewed the patch and concluded that it would be better to split
compute_minimal_stats into two functions instead of sprinkling it so
liberally with if's. So I did that and pushed it.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2015-09-23 23:10:37 Re: clearing opfuncid vs. parallel query
Previous Message Jim Nasby 2015-09-23 22:27:30 Re: No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!