Re: Retire has_multiple_baserels()
От | Richard Guo |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Retire has_multiple_baserels() |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAMbWs4-Y+ynBA1UjxXZR7=dUGjiQtVxFgWWxnWerHz3N2=a44Q@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Retire has_multiple_baserels() (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 1:13 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
I thought this test wasn't too complete, because has_multiple_baserels
isn't reached at all in many cases thanks to the way the calling if()
is coded. I tried testing like this instead:
diff --git a/src/backend/optimizer/path/allpaths.c b/src/backend/optimizer/path/allpaths.c
index eea49cca7b..3f6fc51fb4 100644
--- a/src/backend/optimizer/path/allpaths.c
+++ b/src/backend/optimizer/path/allpaths.c
@@ -2649,6 +2649,8 @@ set_subquery_pathlist(PlannerInfo *root, RelOptInfo *rel,
*/
remove_unused_subquery_outputs(subquery, rel, run_cond_attrs);
+ Assert(has_multiple_baserels(root) == (bms_membership(root->all_baserels) == BMS_MULTIPLE));
+
/*
* We can safely pass the outer tuple_fraction down to the subquery if the
* outer level has no joining, aggregation, or sorting to do. Otherwise
and came to the same conclusion: check-world finds no cases where
the assertion fails. So it LGTM too. Pushed.
Thanks for pushing!
Thanks
Richard
Thanks
Richard
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: