On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 8:52 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I think there is some chance that such a change could induce > regression for the cases when there are many index columns or I think > even when index is on multiple columns (consider index is on first and > eight column in a ten column table). > > I don't see that as a problem because the routine only checks for columns that are passed as "interesting_cols". Noticed below comment in interesting-attrs-2.patch > + * are considered the "key" of rows in the table, and columns that are > + * part of indirect indexes. > > Is it right to mention about indirect indexes in above comment > considering indirect indexes are still not part of core code? > I agree. We can add details about indirect indexes or WARM later, as and when those patches get committed. > Pavan, please rebase your WARM patch on top of this and let me know how > you like it. I'll post a new version of indirect indexes later this > week. > > I've rebased WARM on top of this patch and the proposed changes look fine from WARM's perspective too. I'll send rebased patches separately. Thanks, Pavan -- Pavan Deolasee http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
