From: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>
To: Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: List pgsql-patches <pgsql-patches@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: WIP Join Removal
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 17:17:19 +0100
Message-ID: <1220372239.4371.459.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87k5dusfgc.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com>
References: <1220176372.4371.118.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant>
<48BC4127.30706@enterprisedb.com>
<1220348487.4371.307.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant>
<14377.1220369736@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<87k5dusfgc.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com>
On Tue, 2008-09-02 at 17:03 +0100, Gregory Stark wrote:
> Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:
>
> > Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes:
> >> On Mon, 2008-09-01 at 22:23 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> >>> Did plan invalidation make it safe to rely on the presence of a unique
> >>> index for planning decisions?
> >
> >> My understanding was "Yes" and this case was the specific reason I
> >> originally wanted to pursue plan invalidation back in 2006.
>
> It may be worth considering what other cases...
On other patches, yes.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
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: pgsql-patches@postgresql.org
Cc: simon@2ndQuadrant.com, stark@enterprisedb.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com
Subject: Re: WIP Join Removal
In-Reply-To: <1220372239.4371.459.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox