Re: Memoize ANTI and SEMI JOIN inner

From: David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Alena Rybakina <a(dot)rybakina(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
Cc: Andrei Lepikhov <lepihov(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Memoize ANTI and SEMI JOIN inner
Date: 2025-03-31 03:04:18
Message-ID: CAApHDvqbVaiAV0xsk0G4W7mmN89vG-dZ1jTYQS=jT1041e82zA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, 31 Mar 2025 at 15:33, Alena Rybakina <a(dot)rybakina(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
> I believe it's worth asserting that both inner_unique and single_mode are not true at the same time — just as a safety check.

add_paths_to_joinrel() just chooses not to populate inner_unique for
SEMI and ANTI joins because, as of today's master, it's pretty
pointless to determine that because the executor will short-circuit
and skip to the next outer tuple for those join types anyway. I don't
follow why having both these flags set would cause trouble. It seems
perfectly legitimate that add_paths_to_joinrel() could choose to set
the inner_unique flag for these join types, and if it did, the Assert
you're proposing would fail for no good reason.

David

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message vignesh C 2025-03-31 03:04:32 Re: Commit fest 2025-03
Previous Message David Rowley 2025-03-31 02:56:56 Re: Reducing memory consumed by RestrictInfo list translations in partitionwise join planning