On Tue, May 28, 2024 at 02:44:28PM +1200, David Rowley wrote:
> On Sun, 26 May 2024 at 15:57, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote:
> > Agreed. I changed it to:
> >
> > Allow btree indexes to more efficiently find a set of values, such
> > as
> > those supplied by IN subqueries
> >
> > Is that good?
>
> I think this needs further adjustment. An "IN subquery" is an IN
> clause which contains a subquery. As far as I understand it,
> 5bf748b86 does nothing to improve those. It's there to improve IN with
> a set of values such as IN(1,2,3).
>
> Maybe "IN subqueries" can be replaced with "an SQL IN clause".
Okay, I went with:
Allow btree indexes to more efficiently find a set of values,
such as those supplied by IN clauses using constants (Peter Geoghegan,
Matthias van de Meent)
--
Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
Only you can decide what is important to you.
