On Tue, Aug 20, 2024 at 02:33:23PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
>> Yeah, I was wondering about that. I wouldn't do it exactly like
>> that, but with a check that the entry gets matched somewhere.
>
> Here's a patch for that (again based on the other patch series).
> This did not turn up anything interesting, but it's probably
> worth keeping.
Okay, I see where you're going with this one. It does not seem like
this is going to cost much in long-term maintenance while catching
unfortunate issues, so +1 from me.
The patch does not apply on HEAD due to the dependency with the other
things you are proposing, and I would have hardcoded failures to check
that the reports are correct, but that looks neat on read.
--
Michael