Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> This stuff seems very useful. How come it sits unreviewed for so long?
I think the review is hard for people who are not interested in the planner
very much. And as for further development, there are a few design decisions
that can hardly be resolved without Tom Lane's comments. Right now I recall
two problems: 1) is the way I currently store RelOptInfo for the grouped
relations correct?, 2) how should we handle types for which logical equality
does not imply physical (byte-wise) equality?
Fortunately it seems now that I'm not the only one who cares about 2), so this
problem might be resolved soon:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAH2-Wzn3Ee49Gmxb7V1VJ3-AC8fWn-Fr8pfWQebHe8rYRxt5OQ%40mail.gmail.com
But 1) still remains.
--
Antonin Houska
Web: https://www.cybertec-postgresql.com