On Tue, 2007-01-30 at 18:06 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > "Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > What would be wrong with checking for a NOT NULL constraint? Thats how > > other planners cope with it. Or are you thinking about lack of plan > > invalidation? > > Yup, without that, depending on constraints for plan correctness is > pretty risky. > > Basically what I see here is a whole lot of work and new executor > infrastructure for something that will be a win in a very narrow > use-case and a significant loss the rest of the time. I think there > are more productive ways to spend our development effort.
For that part of the email, I was talking about your ideas on NOT IN. Checking for the explicit exclusion of NULLs is worthwhile with/without plan invalidation. -- Simon Riggs EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
