Re: inner join removal
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: inner join removal |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AANLkTikOFqf77G7SB_Kez469-yJZ2oXqdBw8UZSDxgXb@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: inner join removal (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: inner join removal
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 3:05 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: >> On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 2:48 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> I think it might work out better if you ask "what >>> additional conditions are needed in order to prove that this inner join >>> can commute with this left join", and then work at being able to prove >>> that. (It's entirely likely that the planner isn't currently gathering >>> the right information for solving that problem.) > >> We have to avoid putting much of anything into the critical path where >> we're trying out different join orders - we want to figure it out >> earlier and, if possible, by examining each relation just once. > > Right, but look for example at the logic involved with the current outer > join transformation identity #3, which can't be applied unless the join > predicate is strict for the left-hand side. We avoid doing the dogwork > to test that more than once. <admits ignorance> Uh... where exactly is that logic? I've been looking for it for 2 years and haven't found it yet. > I'm hoping that something similar will > work for this problem. But it's way premature to say much about that > without a mathematical characterization of the extra conditions needed > to make the joins commutable. I wrote a previous email on this topic which might be a start in that direction. http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-10/msg01012.php -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: