On Fri, 29 Sept 2023 at 03:23, Tom Lane wrote:
> FWIW, I'd argue for dropping print_path rather than continuing to
> maintain it. I never use it, finding pprint() to serve the need
> better and more reliably.
Then perhaps we just need to open a thread with an appropriate subject
to check if anyo
David Rowley writes:
> In [1] Andrey highlighted that I'd forgotten to add print_path()
> handling for TidRangePaths in bb437f995.
> I know the OPTIMIZER_DEBUG code isn't exactly well used. I never
> personally use it and I work quite a bit in the planner, however, if
> we're keeping it, I thoug
On 2023-Sep-29, David Rowley wrote:
> In [1] Andrey highlighted that I'd forgotten to add print_path()
> handling for TidRangePaths in bb437f995.
>
> I know the OPTIMIZER_DEBUG code isn't exactly well used. I never
> personally use it and I work quite a bit in the planner, however, if
> we're ke
In [1] Andrey highlighted that I'd forgotten to add print_path()
handling for TidRangePaths in bb437f995.
I know the OPTIMIZER_DEBUG code isn't exactly well used. I never
personally use it and I work quite a bit in the planner, however, if
we're keeping it, I thought maybe we might get the memo o
