Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Tom Lane wrote: > >> I think it should be dropped entirely. The argument against was that > >> it complicated the code in a non-performance-critical path, and that > >> argument isn't going to be different next time. > > > I only kept it for 8.4 because I was worried it might be needed for HOT > > performance. > > No such argument has been made in my hearing, and I can't imagine why > either of the functions touched by the patch would be more > performance-critical for HOT than they are today.
OK, removed from 8.4 queue. -- Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
