On Mon, Aug 31, 2026 at 02:33:40PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 30, 2026 at 07:21:07PM -0500, Sami Imseih wrote:
>>> Claude advises me that removing the redundant filter clause was a mistake.
>>> See the attached patch.
>>
>> Yes, that was a miss. I did a quick confirmation of the execution plans
>> with and without the patch and the change LGTM.
>
> The extra time taken would really hurt when retrieving statistics.
> There may be an argument in simply reverting 4b5ba0c4ca52, as one of
> the reasons for it was to remove the qual you are re-adding, but I
> cannot get excited about using two sets of catalog names for tablename
> and spcname vs a single OID array approach in the long run.
Committed, thanks for reviewing.
--
nathan
