As pointed out by Naoya Anzai, my previous try at this was a few bricks
shy of a load, because I had forgotten that the initial-positioning logic
might not try to skip over nulls at the end of the index the scan will
start from.  We ought to fix that, because it represents an unnecessary
inefficiency, but first let's get the scan-stop logic back to a safe
state.  With this patch, we preserve the performance benefit requested
in bug #6278 for the case of scanning forward into NULLs (in a NULLS
LAST index), but the reverse case of scanning backward across NULLs
when there's no suitable initial-positioning qual is still inefficient.