David Rowley <dgrowle...@gmail.com> writes:
> I've adjusted the comments to what you mentioned and also leaned out
> the pretty expensive test case to something that'll run much faster
> and pushed the result.
+1, I was wondering if the test could be cheaper. It wasn't horrid
as Richard had it, but core regression tests add up over time.
>> However ... it seems like we're not out of the woods yet. Why
>> is Richard's proposed test case still showing
>> + -> Memoize (actual rows=5000 loops=N)
>> + Cache Key: t1.two, t1.two
>> Seems like there is missing de-duplication logic, or something.
> This seems separate and isn't quite causing the same problems as what
> Richard wants to fix so I didn't touch this for now.
Fair enough, but I think it might be worth pursuing later.
regards, tom lane
