> - Prove IS NOT NULL inference for large arrays
>
> NR: No idea.
As the fairly new author of this patch, my perspective is that this
patch got quite a bit of review, albeit without a formal "yes or no"
response.
I'm obviously interested in getting it committed, and I believe it's a
fairly simple patch to look at (though since it's in predtest probably
requires extra brain cycles to be careful we don't make spurious
assumptions in the optimizer). It's also an obvious performance win
for queries that can use partial indexes with almost no additional
optimizer overhead.
But I'm also interested in feedback on how patches like this work in
the review process -- particularly when given the fair amount of
discussion/cleanup but without a final word. As a new patch author a
lot of understanding how this works feels very much like a "learn as
you go", but since there's not a lot of information directly written
on it I figured asking explicitly is the best way to learn the process
better.
Thanks,
James Coleman
