Andrew Gierth <and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk> writes:
> "Tom" == Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:
> Tom> Looks about right. Not sure if we need to bother with a regression
> Tom> test case; once that's in, it'd be hard to break it.
> We could check the EXPLAIN output (since the Materialize node would show
> up), but it's not easy to get stable plans since the choice of which
> path to put on the outside is not fixed. Based on what I found when
> actually testing the code, it probably wouldn't be worth the effort.
If it's not easy to test, I agree it's not worth it.
(Given how long it took anyone to notice this, the difficulty of
making a stable test case is unsurprising, perhaps.)
regards, tom lane
