| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: strange IS NULL behaviour |
| Date: | 2013-09-07 01:57:22 |
| Message-ID: | 20130907015722.GA11757@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 05:06:41PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Another possible fix would be to avoid the IS NULL value optimizer
> expansion if a ROW construct is inside a ROW(). I have attached a patch
> that does this for review.
Having received no replies, do people perfer this version of the patch
that just punts nested ROW IS NULL testing to execQual.c?
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2013-09-07 03:00:24 | Re: strange IS NULL behaviour |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2013-09-07 01:25:02 | Re: ECPG FETCH readahead |