On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 5:59 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > I'm reasonably convinced that this is a good fix for HEAD, but am of two > minds whether to back-patch it or not. The problem complained of in > bug #7598 may seem a bit narrow, but the real point is that whether you > write a cast explicitly or not shouldn't affect planning if the > semantics are the same. This might well be a significant though > previously unrecognized performance issue, particularly for people who > use varchar columns heavily.
I have had a few bad experiences with people getting *really* upset about plan changes in minor releases, so I would be disinclined to back-patch this, even if we're fairly sure that it will be an improvement in most/all cases. It's just not worth the risk of discovering otherwise. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
