On Mon, Aug 31, 2026 at 02:33:40PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Sun, Aug 30, 2026 at 07:21:07PM -0500, Sami Imseih wrote: >>> Claude advises me that removing the redundant filter clause was a mistake. >>> See the attached patch. >> >> Yes, that was a miss. I did a quick confirmation of the execution plans >> with and without the patch and the change LGTM. > > The extra time taken would really hurt when retrieving statistics. > There may be an argument in simply reverting 4b5ba0c4ca52, as one of > the reasons for it was to remove the qual you are re-adding, but I > cannot get excited about using two sets of catalog names for tablename > and spcname vs a single OID array approach in the long run.
Committed, thanks for reviewing. -- nathan
