Re: join removal
| От | Dimitri Fontaine |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: join removal |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 46DF5E85-96A8-4A18-8EF2-E054AE9AE4CA@hi-media.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: join removal (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
reducejoins.c ? flattenjoins.c ? filterjoins.c ? -- dim Le 28 mars 2010 à 22:12, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> a écrit : > Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: >> On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 2:10 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> joinremoval.c ? > >> Maybe, except as I mentioned in the email linked upthread, my plan >> for >> implementing inner join removal would also include allowing join >> reordering in cases where we currently don't. So I don't want to >> sandbox it too tightly as join removal, per se, though that's >> certainly what we have on the table ATM. It's more like advanced >> open-heart join-tree surgery - like prepjointree, but much later in >> the process. > > Hm. At this point we're not really working with a join *tree* in any > case --- the data structure we're mostly concerned with is the list of > SpecialJoinInfo structs, and what we're trying to do is weaken the > constraints described by that list. So I'd rather stay away from > "tree" > terminology. > > planjoins.c would fit with other names in the plan/ directory but it > seems like a misnomer because we're not really "planning" any joins > at this stage. > > adjustjoins.c? loosenjoins.c? weakenjoins.c? > > regards, tom lane > > -- > Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: