Re: Canonicalization of WHERE clauses considered harmful
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Canonicalization of WHERE clauses considered harmful |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 8814.1071094462@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Canonicalization of WHERE clauses considered harmful (Bruno Wolff III <bruno@wolff.to>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Bruno Wolff III <bruno@wolff.to> writes: > Shouldn't it be possible to simplify > a AND (a OR c) AND (b OR a) AND (b OR c) > to > a AND (b or c) > using > a AND (a OR x) == a That would be one possible response, but it strikes me as a band-aid fix. It would add quite a bit of overhead (looking to see if any OR subclauses match any top-level clauses) on top of the rather expensive equality checks qual_cleanup() is already making. Another problem is that sometimes prepqual decides not to attempt CNF-ification at all, which means that the ability to pull out duplicate subclauses is lost altogether. I think it'd be cleaner to expend the cycles on a direct check for duplicate subclauses, which we could apply independently of any decision to convert what remains to CNF form. We've had lots of problems with prepqual before, which is why those heuristics about whether to try for CNF or DNF are in there; but I've never been very happy about them. What I'm on about now is the idea that maybe the whole problem should be thrown overboard ... regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: