Greg Stark <st...@mit.edu> writes: > On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 3:16 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > So I now propose reverting the earlier two patches (but not their > regression test cases of course) and instead hacking MergeAppend plan > building as per (2).
> As a wise man once said, "This is tricky stuff". I feel a better that > I got stuck on this stuff when you're still trying to feel your way > after this many go-arounds. Well, looking back on it, I feel this was at bottom a documentation failure. I think that when I wrote the EquivalenceClass code, I knew that "child" members did not have similar semantics to regular members. But I had forgotten that when Teodor reported the MergeAppend bug, and so misdiagnosed what I was seeing happen as being corruption of the EC contents, when it wasn't really. I added some documentation around this point in the patch I committed yesterday... regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers