On Thu, Mar 19, 2026 at 9:18 AM Andrei Lepikhov <lepihov@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 18/3/26 18:55, Kirill Reshke wrote:
> > On Wed, 18 Mar 2026 at 18:31, Andrei Lepikhov <lepihov@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 18/3/26 13:21, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Mar 18, 2026 at 2:18 PM Andrei Lepikhov <lepihov@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> What is the reason for the second change? Tender, can you show us how to
> >>>> reproduce the issue so we can support your update to
> >>>> restrict_infos_logically_equal? If we include it, we should add a test.
> >>>
> >>> I think Tender already shown this in [1]. The same qual is present
> >>> twice in the plan.
> >> Got it. I suggest making this a separate commit to keep the history
> >> clear. Let me share a draft with a test case for the bug fix first.
> > Hi!
> > Is `cool_bool` a typo of `col_bool` in regression test ?
>
> This is actually a happy coincidence, not a typo. We made this mistake
> during initial development because I didn't realise that a boolean
> operation on a bool variable is never wrapped in an expression
> structure. It's a 'cool' example that shows a rare edge case.
>
> > And the patch seems to have forgotten to add "Reported by".
>
> Yeah, let the committer manage the award part.
I've revised the patch. Renamed cool_bool to cool_col, added
"Reported by", and revised authors list according to my opinion.
------
Regards,
Alexander Korotkov
Supabase
