public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Andrei Lepikhov <[email protected]>
To: Alexander Korotkov <[email protected]>
Cc: Robert Haas <[email protected]>
Cc: Alena Rybakina <[email protected]>
Cc: jian he <[email protected]>
Cc: Nikolay Shaplov <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: Peter Geoghegan <[email protected]>
Cc: Marcos Pegoraro <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <[email protected]>
Cc: Ranier Vilela <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: POC, WIP: OR-clause support for indexes
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2024 09:09:29 +0700
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPpHfdvxF1OZUoJr2bg8cmAnty-KyRkswPa3hCPSmR5gSx7-Yg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <[email protected]>
<CAPpHfdvF864n=Lzmjd2XBi9TwboZvrhRtLSt2hCP+JVUv6XKzg@mail.gmail.com>
<CACJufxHCJvC3X8nUK-jRvRru-ZEXp16EBPADOwTGaqmOYM1Raw@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<CAPpHfduBA9RXa1LQAz=wFK8cGx_AaHVK_vnNqCnG4yA7KwFf7g@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAPpHfds4wGdWQ2xx1OUKZC4ggqS6Q=cBSck9Re1ajY0ESkwcmw@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+TgmoZ3tQ3Zwzo+9uXQL_tf0rDHQHKeZ4bGt1LDvL+_dqghUg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAPpHfdt8kowRDUkmOnO7_WJJQ1uk+O379JiZCk_9_Pt5AQ4+0w@mail.gmail.com>
<CAPpHfdu9QJ=Gbua3CUUH2KKG_8urakJTen4JD47PGh9wWP=QxQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAPpHfds3m=55cY1ea1TRzUAgD3pgwmvqm=exVMdOM4q+YT6kHg@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAPpHfdvxF1OZUoJr2bg8cmAnty-KyRkswPa3hCPSmR5gSx7-Yg@mail.gmail.com>
On 10/17/24 03:39, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 7:22 AM Andrei Lepikhov <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 10/12/24 21:25, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
>>> I forgot to specify (COSTS OFF) for EXPLAINs in regression tests. Fixed in v42.
>> I've passed through the patch set.
>>
>> Let me put aside the v42-0003 patch—it looks debatable, and I need time
>> to analyse the change in regression tests caused by this patch.
>
> Yes, 0003 patch is for illustration purposes for now. I will not keep
> rebasing it. We can pick it later when main patches are committed.
Got it. I will save it into the TODO list.
>
>> Comments look much better according to my current language level. Ideas
>> with fast exits also look profitable and are worth an additional
>> 'matched' variable.
>>
>> So, in general, it is ok. I think only one place with
>> inner_other_clauses can be improved. Maybe it will be enough to create
>> this list only once, outside 'foreach(j, groupedArgs)' cycle? Also, the
>> comment on the necessity of this operation was unclear to me. See the
>> attachment for my modest attempt at improving it.
>
> Thank you, I've integrated your patch with minor edits from me.
Thanks, I'm not sure about necessity to check NIL value of a list
(list_free also do it), but I'm ok with the edits.
--
regards, Andrei Lepikhov
view thread (78+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: POC, WIP: OR-clause support for indexes
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox