+1 (bind) On Wed, Oct 28, 2026 at 7:48 AM Andrei Tserakhau via dev < [email protected]> wrote:
> +1 (non-binding) > > On Wed, Oct 28, 2026 at 1:14 PM Maximilian Michels <[email protected]> wrote: > >> +1 (non-binding) >> >> On Wed, Oct 28, 2026 at 7:50 AM Péter Váry <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> > +1 >> > >> > On Wed, Oct 28, 2026, 04:15 Amogh Jahagirdar <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> +1 (binding) >> >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 27, 2026 at 8:51 PM Daniel Weeks <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> +1 (binding) >> >>> >> >>> On Tue, Oct 27, 2026, 6:50 PM Steven Wu <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>> +1 (binding) >> >>>> >> >>>> On Tue, Oct 27, 2026 at 5:33 PM Anoop Johnson <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>>>> >> >>>>> +1 (non-binding) >> >>>>> >> >>>>> On Tue, Oct 27, 2026, 5:15 PM Ryan Blue <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> Hi everyone, >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> This is a vote for the stats-only fields discussed in this thread. >> The changes are in PR #18405. This change adds a `stats-fields` list that >> assigns table field IDs so that stats for partition fields and expressions >> like `to_lower_case` can be stored in the `content_stats` struct. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> Please vote within the next 72 hours. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> [ ] +1 Add stats-only fields to the table spec >> >>>>>> [ ] +0 >> >>>>>> [ ] -1 Do not add stats-only fields because . . . >> >
