David Rowley <david.row...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > (This is pretty minor, but I struggled to ignore it) > In RelationGetIndexAttrBitmap() a comment claims /* We return our > original working copy for caller to play with */. 3 of the 4 possible > Bitmapsets follow that comment but for some reason, we make a copy of > the primary key attrs before returning. This seems both unnecessary > and also quite out of sync to what all the other Bitmapsets do. I > don't quite see any reason for doing it so I assume there's none.
I agree, that's pretty bogus. Will push in a minute. regards, tom lane