From: | Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: An incorrect check in get_memoize_path |
Date: | 2025-04-14 06:49:59 |
Message-ID: | CAMbWs49nbDOBo_0H6crjewDv=HxtA84rrv-70R+_yhAZom06gQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Apr 7, 2025 at 4:50 PM Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Hence, I propose the attached patch for the fix.
>
> BTW, there is a XXX comment there saying that maybe we can make the
> remaining join quals part of the inner scan's filter instead of the
> join filter. I don't think this is possible in all cases. In the
> above query, 'coalesce(t2.b) = t3.b' cannot be made part of t3's scan
> filter, according to join_clause_is_movable_into. So I removed that
> comment in the patch while we're here.
>
> Any thoughts?
Here is an updated patch with a commit message. Regarding
backporting, I'm inclined not to, given the lack of field reports.
Any objections to pushing it?
Thanks
Richard
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v2-0001-Fix-an-incorrect-check-in-get_memoize_path.patch | application/octet-stream | 3.0 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dmitry Dolgov | 2025-04-14 07:20:44 | Re: Changing shared_buffers without restart |
Previous Message | Tender Wang | 2025-04-14 06:17:17 | Re: MergeJoin beats HashJoin in the case of multiple hash clauses |