On Wed, Jul 13, 2022 at 05:07:53PM +1200, David Rowley wrote: > While I agree that the gains on making this change are small. It just > accounts to saving a call to bms_add_member() when we've already found > the partition to be interleaved due to interleaved Datum values, I > just disagree with not doing anything about it. My reasons are: > > 1. This code is new to PG15. We have the opportunity now to make a > meaningful improvement and backpatch it. When PG15 is out, the bar is > set significantly higher for fixing this type of thing due to having > to consider the additional cost of backpatching conflicts with other > future fixes in that area. > 2. I think the code as I just pushed it is easier to understand than > what was there before.
Fair enough. > 3. I'd like to encourage people to look at and critique our newly > added code. Having a concern addressed seems like a good reward for > the work. +1 -- Nathan Bossart Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
