Matt Long writes:
> I finally got around to testing your patch on a realistic data set. In
> short, the patch worked beautifully even with the division by 2 removed. In
> case it's helpful, the full write up of my investigation can be found at
> https://gist.github.com/mattlong/0617bec6e1cf5bc6b70
I finally got around to testing your patch on a realistic data set. In
short, the patch worked beautifully even with the division by 2 removed. In
case it's helpful, the full write up of my investigation can be found at
https://gist.github.com/mattlong/0617bec6e1cf5bc6b70c6c2951901df7
Your reasoni
On Thu, 18 Sep 2025 12:59:11 -0400
Tom Lane wrote:
> Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais writes:
> > On a fresh instance from HEAD with its default configuration, it shows:
>
> > Index Scan using foo_s_idx on foo (cost=0.29..8.39 rows=3 width=13)
> > Index Cond: (s(crit, ackid) = true)
>
>
On 19/9/2025 03:05, David Rowley wrote:
On Thu, 18 Sept 2025 at 23:55, Andrei Lepikhov wrote:
Perhaps we should start working on introducing this type of callback/ hook?
There's certainly places where you could add a hook that would just
add an unacceptable overhead that we couldn't stomach. I
On 9/18/25 18:40, Tom Lane wrote:
The attached fixes things so it works like it did pre-a391ff3c3.
Indeed, it works well!
I spent some time trying to devise a test case, and was reminded
of why I didn't have one before: it's hard to make a case that
will be robust enough to not show diffs
