From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Zahir Lalani <ZahirLalani(at)oliver(dot)agency>, "pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Odd Shortcut behaviour in PG14 |
Date: | 2023-11-23 18:40:38 |
Message-ID: | CAKFQuwbM5DpPcC3bVFcjACLvQoBqnPbowDoBEeUt5wA=Q687JQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Thursday, November 23, 2023, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> "David G. Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > On Thursday, November 23, 2023, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> >> This question is unanswerable as given. You have not even defined
> >> what you mean by "fail" (error? wrong query result?), let alone
> >> provided enough detail for someone else to reproduce the problem.
>
> > The OP complains about the apparent inconsistent optimizing away of the
> SRF
> > function call of crypto_secretbox_open in the lateral when the join
> > predicate is known to be false.
>
> Hmm, your crystal ball apparently works better than mine today,
> because I sure do not see where that information was presented.
>
>
>
My interpretation of:
“ The expectation being that if ekey=0 the lateral join will be ignored. “
David J.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Atul Kumar | 2023-11-23 19:18:25 | IPV6 issue |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2023-11-23 18:39:09 | Re: Odd Shortcut behaviour in PG14 |