Re: join removal
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: join removal |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 603c8f071003281255l6189a719o8bb7e3a3fa509ec5@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: join removal (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: join removal
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 2:10 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: >> On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> * in a new file in plan/. Not sure if it's worth this, though your >>> thought that we might add more logic later makes it more defensible. > >> I sort of like the last of these ideas though I'm at a loss for what >> to call it. Otherwise I kind of like planmain.c. > > 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. ...Robert
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: