X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org
Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3226C9DCA43
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Sat, 17 Dec 2005 14:35:18 -0400 (AST)
Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 28655-01
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Sat, 17 Dec 2005 14:35:17 -0400 (AST)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C44AD9DC992
	for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Sat, 17 Dec 2005 14:35:15 -0400 (AST)
Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id jBHIZCuO008934;
	Sat, 17 Dec 2005 13:35:12 -0500 (EST)
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
cc: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>,
	=?ISO-8859-1?Q?P=E5l_Stenslet?= <paal.stenslet@exie.com>,
	pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Should Oracle outperform PostgreSQL on a complex 
In-reply-to: <200512171643.jBHGhFA04982@candle.pha.pa.us> 
References: <200512171643.jBHGhFA04982@candle.pha.pa.us>
Comments: In-reply-to Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
	message dated "Sat, 17 Dec 2005 11:43:15 -0500"
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 13:35:12 -0500
Message-ID: <8933.1134844512@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.013 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.013]
X-Spam-Score: 0.013
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200512/428
X-Sequence-Number: 16249

Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> Added to TODO:
> * Allow star join optimizations

See my response to Simon for reasons why this doesn't seem like a
particularly good TODO item.

			regards, tom lane