Re: Proposed Query Planner TODO items

Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:
> If #19 is missing it's because Oleg & I could not get it to complete.  That 
> was also the query which we are most interested in testing.

Q19 doesn't seem to be particularly slow in either the 7.4 or 7.5 tests
--- there are many others with longer runtimes.  I speculate that what
is actually being run here is a modified Q19 query with the merge join
condition pulled out by hand.  The CVS-tip planner should be able to do
that for itself, though, and obtain essentially this same performance
with the per-spec query.
        regards, tom lane