Re: More reliable nbtree detection of unsatisfiable RowCompare quals involving a leading NULL key/element

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
To: Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: More reliable nbtree detection of unsatisfiable RowCompare quals involving a leading NULL key/element
Date: 2025-01-07 15:39:44
Message-ID: CAH2-WznQFCfJsxCt2yOMZ1SrHUfHN-32aVXSLvb-7pPsRt=9QA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jan 7, 2025 at 7:58 AM Matthias van de Meent
<boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> This doesn't really clarify _why_ we'd never get this far, so I'd word that as
>
> + * Cannot be a NULL in the first row member: _bt_preprocess_keys
> + * would've marked the qual as unsatisfyable, preventing us from
> + * ever getting this far.
>
> Apart from that minor issue, LGTM.

Pushed this just now. I used your suggested wording in the committed patch.

Thanks for the review!

--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dave Cramer 2025-01-07 15:41:24 Small patch to use pqMsg_Query instead of `Q`
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2025-01-07 15:30:57 Re: Further _bt_first simplifications for parallel index scans