Re: Parallel Full Hash Join
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Parallel Full Hash Join |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1604497.1680637072@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Parallel Full Hash Join (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Parallel Full Hash Join
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> writes: > I committed the main patch. This left the following code in hash_inner_and_outer (joinpath.c): /* * If the joinrel is parallel-safe, we may be able to consider a * partial hash join. However, we can't handle JOIN_UNIQUE_OUTER, * because the outer path will be partial, and therefore we won't be * able to properly guarantee uniqueness. Similarly, we can't handle * JOIN_FULL and JOIN_RIGHT, because they can produce false null * extended rows. Also, the resulting path must not be parameterized. */ if (joinrel->consider_parallel && save_jointype != JOIN_UNIQUE_OUTER && outerrel->partial_pathlist != NIL && bms_is_empty(joinrel->lateral_relids)) { The comment is no longer in sync with the code: this if-test used to reject JOIN_FULL and JOIN_RIGHT, and no longer does so, but the comment still claims it should. Shouldn't we drop the sentence beginning "Similarly"? (I see that there's now one sub-section that still rejects such cases, but it no longer seems correct to claim that they're rejected overall.) regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: