On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 07:23:19PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> On 17 Jun 2018, at 14:47, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
>> - if (bms_num_members(clauses_attnums) < 2)
>> + if (bms_membership(clauses_attnums) != BMS_MULTIPLE)
>> For this one, the comment above directly mentions that at least two
>> attnums need to be present, so it seems to me that the current coding is
>> easier to understand and intentional... So I would be incline to not
>> change it.
>
> I don’t have any strong feelings either way, and will leave that call to the
> committer who picks this up. I agree that the current coding is easy to
> understand but I don’t see this being much harder.
I have looked at that again, and pushed the portion for postgres_fdw as
the intention is clear, while leaving out the part from the statistics
per the comment close by. Thanks!
--
Michael
