| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Etsuro Fujita <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 |
| Date: | 2018-01-30 19:56:06 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmobfsxY8CK6ozS=VtcBajzSmV1VRKuMRxXedHkfpYOCjQQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 12:20 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> It looks like Etsuro-san's proposed patch locks down the choice of
> plan more tightly, which is probably a reasonable answer.
OK, committed. I added a comment along the lines you suggested
previously, since this no longer seems like a generic test that
happens to involve a bunch of merge joins.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2018-01-30 20:06:02 | Re: JIT compiling with LLVM v9.0 |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2018-01-30 19:28:13 | Re: [HACKERS] MERGE SQL Statement for PG11 |