On Tue, 13 Jul 2021 at 06:50, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentr...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > Your version looks better to me than the original version, but I'm still > -0.05 on changing this at all.
I was more +0.4. It does not seem worth the trouble of too much discussion so, just to try and bring this to a close, instead of adding a comment to explain why we needlessly check the range of the INT8 sequence, I just pushed the patch that removes it and adds the 1 line comment to mention why it's not needed. David
