Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1uGf0o-005NK2-Cq for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Sun, 18 May 2025 14:29:10 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1uGf0l-00ADgU-Lq for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Sun, 18 May 2025 14:29:07 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1uGf0l-00ADgM-DT for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Sun, 18 May 2025 14:29:07 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([68.162.161.243]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1uGf0i-002VoB-1O for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Sun, 18 May 2025 14:29:06 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 54IESwDG2259061; Sun, 18 May 2025 10:28:58 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Alvaro Herrera cc: Alexander Korotkov , Junwang Zhao , Andrei Lepikhov , "pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org" , Tomas Vondra Subject: Re: Incorrect calculation of path fraction value in MergeAppend In-reply-to: <202505181223.ioge4lxntliv@alvherre.pgsql> References: <202505181223.ioge4lxntliv@alvherre.pgsql> Comments: In-reply-to Alvaro Herrera message dated "Sun, 18 May 2025 08:23:06 -0400" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <2259059.1747578538.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Sun, 18 May 2025 10:28:58 -0400 Message-ID: <2259060.1747578538@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk Alvaro Herrera writes: > Personally I can see getting this in 18beta2 without too much additional > arguing for it. But for 15-17 you'd need a lot more support than is > evident in this thread. +1. The bar for causing plan changes in back branches is very high. Unless you can show that the buggy behavior is causing wrong answers, it's usually best to leave it alone. regards, tom lane