On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Personally I'd think that we should retain it for objects; Peter's
> main argument against that was that the comment would be too complicated,
> but that seems a bit silly from here.
I just don't see any point to it. My argument against the complexity
of explaining why the optimization is only used with objects is based
on the costs and the benefits. I think the benefits are very close to
nil.
--
Peter Geoghegan
