Hi, On 2018-08-02 08:21:58 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > I think something on the lines what Tom and you are suggesting can be > done with the help of EXEC_FLAG_BACKWARD, but I don't see the need to > do anything for this patch. The change in nodeLimit.c is any way for > forward scans, so there shouldn't be any need for any other check.
I think this is almost a guarantee to introduce bugs in the future. And besides that, as Robert points out, it's essentially an exiting bug for custom scans. Given that EXEC_FLAG_BACKWARD already exists, why not do the right thing here? Greetings, Andres Freund
