| From: | Vik Fearing <vik(dot)fearing(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Optimize constant MinMax expressions |
| Date: | 2018-12-30 19:29:18 |
| Message-ID: | f35d25e0-80d0-58c9-a875-7f18420f18fe@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 30/12/2018 19:44, Tom Lane wrote:
> Vik Fearing <vik(dot)fearing(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
>> On 30/12/2018 00:36, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Can we assume that the underlying datatype comparison function is
>>> immutable? I guess so, since we assume that in nearby code such as
>>> contain_mutable_functions_walker, but I don't think it should be done
>>> without at least a comment.
>
>> Adding a comment is easy enough. How is the attached?
>
> Pushed with a bit of wordsmithing on the comment.
Thanks! I've updated the commitfest entry to reflect that.
--
Vik Fearing +33 6 46 75 15 36
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Petr Jelinek | 2018-12-30 19:31:34 | Re: Moving slot restart_lsn/catalog_xmin more eagerly from SQL functions |
| Previous Message | Petr Jelinek | 2018-12-30 19:27:51 | Moving slot restart_lsn/catalog_xmin more eagerly from SQL functions |