On Apr9, 2014, at 02:55 , David Rowley <dgrowle...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 8:48 AM, Florian Pflug <f...@phlo.org> wrote: > > As explain above, invtrans_bool is a bit problematic, since it carries > a real risk of performance regressions. It's included for completeness' > sake, and should probably not be committed at this time. > > Did you mean to write invtrans_minmax? Otherwise you didn't explain about > you concerns with bool.
Grmpf. Should have re-read that once more before sending :-( Yes, I meant invtrans_minmax is problematic! invtrans_bool is fine, the inverse transition function never fails for BOOL_AND and BOOL_OR. This is why I factored it out into a separate patch, to make it easy to not apply the MIN/MAX stuff, while still applying the BOOL stuff. Sorry for the confision. best regards, Florian Pflug -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
