On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 2:46 AM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > Well, that'll also make the feature not particularly useful :(. My > suspicion is that the way to suceed here isn't to rely more on testing > as part of the scan, but create a more general fastpath for qual > evaluation, which atm is a *LOT* more heavyweight than what > HeapKeyTest() does. But maybe I'm biased since I'm working on the > latter...
I think you might be right, but I'm not very clear on what the timeline for your work is. It would be easier to say, sure, let's put this on hold if we knew that in a month or two we could come back and retest after you've made some progress. But I don't know whether we're talking about months or years. -- 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
