On Wed, Jul 16, 2025 at 9:17 AM Mircea Cadariu wrote:
> Thanks for the elaboration and updated patch! Indeed, I see it's set in
> the ScanKeyEntryInitialize to either BTGreaterStrategyNumber or
> BTLessStrategyNumber, then few lines lower there's the if with the break.
>
> I'm convinced.
Pushed.
On 16/07/2025 07:27, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
[...] Rather, we rely on the generic logic that
builds our startKeys[] entries. It will inevitably "break" before ever
moving on to the next index attribute/next so->keyData[] key because
strat_total will inevitably become
BTGreaterStrategyNumber/BTLes
On Tue, Jul 15, 2025 at 4:50 PM Mircea Cadariu wrote:
> As an experiment, I added an elog(WARNING,...) just above the main changed
> line in the patch, and then ran the tests (make installcheck). This resulted
> in lines logged next to some of the SELECT statements in the following files
> in s
Hi,
On 07/07/2025 01:22, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
However, there's no reason why "ScanKeyData
notnullkeys[INDEX_MAX_KEYS]" needs to be an array at all. In practice,
_bt_first will only need a single temp notnullkeys ScanKeyData, since
there can never be more than a single deduced NOT NULL constrai