Re: Evaluate expression at planning time for two more cases
От | Ashutosh Bapat |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Evaluate expression at planning time for two more cases |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAG-ACPXEfYXA3vz=e2KoNeP8JhC4C50ZtdeUyZFEsHR+_zyZKw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Evaluate expression at planning time for two more cases (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 8 Sep 2020 at 07:16, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
I'm not sure what I think about Ashutosh's ideas about doing this
somewhere else than eval_const_expressions. I do not buy the argument
that it's interesting to do this separately for each child partition.
Child partitions that have attnotnull constraints different from their
parent's are at best a tiny minority use-case, if indeed we allow them
at all (I tend to think we shouldn't).
I agree about partitions. But, IMO, a child having constraints different from that of a parent is more common in inheritance trees.
Another point I raised in my mail was about constraint exclusion. Why aren't these clauses constant-folded by constraint exclusion? Sorry, I haven't looked at the constraint exclusion code myself for this.
As a not incidental example, consider
select ... from t1 left join t2 on (...) where t2.x is not null;
reduce_outer_joins will realize that the left join can be reduced
to a plain join, whereupon (if t2.x is attnotnull) the WHERE clause
really is constant-true --- and this seems like a poster-child case
for it being useful to optimize away the WHERE clause. But
we won't be able to detect that if we apply the optimization during
eval_const_expressions. So maybe that's a good reason to do it
somewhere later.
+1
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: