Re: freeing bms explicitly - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Kapila
Subject Re: freeing bms explicitly
Date
Msg-id CAA4eK1JoaJxUKQD=1--cHLrhYooLO+nvK-c=+ABmb4kSPu6y3g@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: freeing bms explicitly  (Zhihong Yu <zyu@yugabyte.com>)
Responses Re: freeing bms explicitly  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 9:30 AM Zhihong Yu <zyu@yugabyte.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 8:45 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 3:39 AM Zhihong Yu <zyu@yugabyte.com> wrote:
>>
>> Your patch looks good to me. I have found one more similar instance in
>> the same file and changed that as well accordingly. Let me know what
>> you think of the attached?
>>
>
> Hi, Amit:
> The patch looks good to me.
>

Thanks. I'll push this tomorrow unless Tom or someone else wants to
look at it or would like to commit.

-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: David Rowley
Date:
Subject: Re: [PoC] Reducing planning time when tables have many partitions
Next
From: Andy Fan
Date:
Subject: Re: Condition pushdown: why (=) is pushed down into join, but BETWEEN or >= is not?