From: | Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Some revises in adding sorting path |
Date: | 2024-01-31 07:11:16 |
Message-ID: | CAMbWs49TZxM0Lb5=GmvrkurkMCAy2LocNCL+_Z6xDSCtmpLdPw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 5:13 AM David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Jan 2024 at 00:44, Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > This patchset does not aim to introduce anything new; it simply
> > refactors the existing code. The newly added tests are used to show
> > that the code that is touched here is not redundant, but rather
> > essential for generating certain paths. I remember the tests were added
> > per your comment in [3].
> >
> > [3]
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAApHDvo%2BFagxVSGmvt-LUrhLZQ0KViiLvX8dPaG3ZzWLNd-Zpg%40mail.gmail.com
>
> OK. I've pushed the patched based on it being a simplification of the
> partial path generation.
Thanks for pushing it!
Thanks
Richard
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Richard Guo | 2024-01-31 07:12:26 | Re: Apply the "LIMIT 1" optimization to partial DISTINCT |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2024-01-31 06:48:51 | Re: Should we remove -Wdeclaration-after-statement? |