On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Personally I'd think that we should retain it for objects; Peter's > main argument against that was that the comment would be too complicated, > but that seems a bit silly from here.
I just don't see any point to it. My argument against the complexity of explaining why the optimization is only used with objects is based on the costs and the benefits. I think the benefits are very close to nil. -- Peter Geoghegan -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
