Thank you for polishing this. At Tue, 29 Mar 2016 13:31:19 -0500, Kevin Grittner <kgri...@gmail.com> wrote in <cacjxusnm9+tn0hat0p4wr+sf0bfqdymploew7fydycq2uur...@mail.gmail.com> > I tried to whip this into shape, but there were a few areas I > didn't feel I had the necessary understanding to feel comfortable > taking on the committer role for it. I've cleaned it up the best I > could, fixing whitespace and typos, eliminating an unnecessary > addition of an include, improving C comments (at least to my eye), > and adding an Assert where it seemed like a good idea to me.
Especially for this one, === @@ -2697,6 +2697,7 @@ check_partial_indexes(PlannerInfo *root, RelOptInfo *rel) continue; /* don't repeat work if already proven OK */ have_partial = true; + break; } if (!have_partial) return; === The initialization has been moved to set_rel_size so the break can be restored. > My own tests and those of others show performance improvements (up > to 10x for some tests) and no significant performance degradation, > even with attempts to create "worst case" scenarios. > > The only changes to the regression tests are to change an "out" > file to eliminate re-checking the index predicate against the heap > on every matching row, which seems like a good thing. > > I'm taking my name off as committer and marking it "Ready for > Committer". If someone else wants to comment on the issues where > Tom and Kyotaro-san still seem unsatisfied to the point where I > can get my head around it, I could maybe take it back on as > committer -- if anyone feels that could be a net win. FWIW, as mentioned upthread, I added the following condition to decline ripping index predicates from base restrictinfo without understanding the reason to do so. regards, -- Kyotaro Horiguchi NTT Open Source Software Center -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers