On Wed, Jul 13, 2022 at 05:07:53PM +1200, David Rowley wrote:
> While I agree that the gains on making this change are small. It just
> accounts to saving a call to bms_add_member() when we've already found
> the partition to be interleaved due to interleaved Datum values, I
> just disagree with not doing anything about it. My reasons are:
>
> 1. This code is new to PG15. We have the opportunity now to make a
> meaningful improvement and backpatch it. When PG15 is out, the bar is
> set significantly higher for fixing this type of thing due to having
> to consider the additional cost of backpatching conflicts with other
> future fixes in that area.
> 2. I think the code as I just pushed it is easier to understand than
> what was there before.
Fair enough.
> 3. I'd like to encourage people to look at and critique our newly
> added code. Having a concern addressed seems like a good reward for
> the work.
+1
--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com