Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone.bigpanda.com> writes:
> Well, if you want to be safer, I guess you could (at runtime) decide that
> the table's gotten too big and fall back to the old method if you didn't
> entirely rip it out. I'm not sure if that'd be too ugly though, but it
> would mean that you wouldn't have to worry about it returning too many
> tuples.
I did it this way --- it falls back to the old code if the TID hash
table grows to exceed SortMem. Should be noticeably faster than the
old code for reasonably-sized IN lists.
regards, tom lane
