On 2016-10-31 09:28:00 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> 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.

Me neither.  But I think if we can stomach Dilip's approach of using a
slot in heapam, then I think my concerns are addressed, and this is
probably going go to be a win regardless of faster expression evaluation
and/or batching.

> 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.

I sure hope it's months.


Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to