David Rowley <david.row...@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On Fri, 14 Jun 2019 at 05:22, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
>>> So I think that this should probably be changed to say something like
>>> "Improve optimization of self-joins on ctid columns" or "Improve
>>> optimization of joins involving columns of type tid."
>> The latter seems fine to me.
> The latter seems a bit inaccurate to me given the fact that a column
> with the type tid could exist elsewhere in the table. Perhaps
> "columns of type tid" can be swapped with "a table's ctid column".
It's true that the parameterized-tidscan patch only helps for joins
to CTID, but the other patch helps for joins to any tid column.
So I still say Robert's wording is fine.
regards, tom lane
