RE: Bug in execution of EXISTS and IN clauses for large tables

Thank you Tom,

I agree, there is not much sense in dissecting it if it's not reproducible in the current versions.

Just to confirm (sorry if this is a trivial question) - the "exists" and "in" should never behave like an inner join, right?
Thanks.

Best wishes,
Martin

>
Martin Kos
Follow Us
Biomedical Data Scientist Analytics
E: martin(dot)kos(at)molecularhealth(dot)com
Molecular Health GmbH
Kurfürsten-Anlage 21
69115Heidelberg
www.molecularhealth.com
Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Prof. Dr. Christof Hettich
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Friedrich von Bohlen und Halbach (Sprecher der Geschäftsleitung), Dr. Stephan Brock
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Heidelberg
Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Mannheim - HRB 338037

Confidentiality note: ​The information in this email and any attachment may contain confidential and proprietary information of Molecular Health GmbH, Molecular Health, Inc. and/or its affiliates and may be privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is strictly prohibited and may cause liability. In case you have received this message due to an error in transmission, we kindly ask you to notify the sender immediately and to delete this email and any attachment from your system.
​
​Disclaimer: The information in this transmission contains privileged and confidential information, including patient information protected by federal and state privacy laws. It is intended only for the use of the person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified, that any review, dissemination, distribution or duplication of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
-----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
> Sent: Tuesday, 22 February 2022 16:45
> To: David G. Johnston <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
> Cc: Martin Kos <martin(dot)kos(at)molecularhealth(dot)com>; pgsql-
> bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: Bug in execution of EXISTS and IN clauses for large tables
>
> Caution - External Sender: This message is from an external source and
> may contain unsafe content. Please do not click on any links or open any
> attachments unless you are sure. If in doubt, contact the MH Service Desk for
> a further plausibility check.
>
> "David G. Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > This seems like a decent report (haven’t played with it), still,
> > version 11.1!
>
> Indeed. I can't see any problem in 11.current --- for me, the first four queries
> all give 44272445, the next 72002328, and the last two 60000000. So either
> we fixed it since 11.1, or the problem requires some nondefault setting that
> wasn't mentioned. I'm not particularly interested in bisecting to see where it
> was fixed.
>
> regards, tom lane