Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 7:17 AM, Marti Raudsepp <ma...@juffo.org> wrote:
>> I know that the Merge Append patch required some changes in the
>> min/max optimization, which is probably the cause.
> Yeah, I think this is a direct result of commit
> 034967bdcbb0c7be61d0500955226e1234ec5f04.
Yeah, looks that way. I'm not sure what it would take to re-support
this case without losing the other advantages of the change. Personally
I'm not terribly excited about it: I don't think that suppressing nulls
from an index this way is really very useful. Using a partial index
probably eats more planner cycles than you'll save, overall.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
