On Sat, 14 Jun 2025 at 16:10, Junwang Zhao wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jun 14, 2025 at 11:27 AM David Rowley wrote:
> > How about adding "We don't bother validating that trss_mintid is less
> > than or equal to trss_maxtid, as the scan_set_tidrange() table AM
> > function will detect that."
>
> Sounds goo
Hi David,
On Sat, Jun 14, 2025 at 11:27 AM David Rowley wrote:
>
> On Wed, 11 Jun 2025 at 14:26, Junwang Zhao wrote:
> > This is not a common case, it's just a corner case while
> > playing around the TidRangeScan.
> >
> > I'm not saying this is an optimization, it just makes me a little
> > con
On Wed, 11 Jun 2025 at 14:26, Junwang Zhao wrote:
> This is not a common case, it's just a corner case while
> playing around the TidRangeScan.
>
> I'm not saying this is an optimization, it just makes me a little
> confused when I see the lowerBound > upperBound and
> it still returns true.
>
> T
Hi David,
On Mon, Jun 9, 2025 at 9:52 AM David Rowley wrote:
>
> On Sun, 8 Jun 2025 at 21:41, Junwang Zhao wrote:
> > The comments of TidRangeEval saids:
> >
> > ```
> > Returns false if we detect the range cannot contain any tuples.
> > ```
> >
> > After narrowing the upper and lower bounds, we
On Sun, 8 Jun 2025 at 21:41, Junwang Zhao wrote:
> The comments of TidRangeEval saids:
>
> ```
> Returns false if we detect the range cannot contain any tuples.
> ```
>
> After narrowing the upper and lower bounds, we can add an
> additional check to verify if the lower bound exceeds the
> upper b
