Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan@kaltenbrunner.cc> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Nobody suggested dismissing it. The point was that it hasn't been
>> tested adequately to justify applying it now.
> not sure what testing people want to get done though (there are a fair
> amount of results and profiles in the thread)?
Robert was complaining that the worst case hadn't been characterized
adequately, which I agree with. We know it helps a lot on certain
cases, but what's the downside?
regards, tom lane
