Re: Planning for improved versions of IN/NOT IN

From: "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
To: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: Planning for improved versions of IN/NOT IN
Date: 2002-11-28 02:31:37
Message-ID: 053e01c29686$46aaadd0$6500a8c0@internal
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> The difficulty is that it's not clear how to choose one of these four
> ways, short of planning the *entire* query from scratch all four ways :-(.
> This seems pretty grim. Approaches #2 and #3 could be handled as local
> transformations of the WHERE clause, but we couldn't choose which to use
> very well if we don't yet know how many outer rows the WHERE clause will
> be executed for. Approach #1 is really planning a completely different
> query --- one with an extra FROM-item --- and there's not going to be
> all that much commonality in the computations, unless we restrict where
> the added FROM-item can be joined to the others, which'd more or less
> defeat the purpose.

What about in the case of a scalar subquery eg. SELECT x IN
(1,2,3,4,54,56,6), when there maybe hundreds of scalars?

Chris

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Marc G. Fournier 2002-11-28 02:36:14 v7.3 Packaged ...
Previous Message David Walker 2002-11-28 00:34:12 Re: Boolean casting in 7.3 -> changed?