Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56])
	by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps  (TLS1.3) tls
 TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384
	(Exim 4.94.2)
	(envelope-from <pgsql-bugs-owner+archive@lists.postgresql.org>)
	id 1tnAs4-002qkT-1A
	for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 26 Feb 2025 06:26:16 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org)
	by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2)
	(envelope-from <pgsql-bugs-owner+archive@lists.postgresql.org>)
	id 1tnAs2-00GXoQ-NK
	for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 26 Feb 2025 06:26:14 +0000
Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229])
	by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps  (TLS1.3) tls
 TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384
	(Exim 4.94.2)
	(envelope-from <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
	id 1tnAs2-00GXoI-Ef
	for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Wed, 26 Feb 2025 06:26:14 +0000
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([68.162.161.243])
	by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps  (TLS1.3) tls
 TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384
	(Exim 4.96)
	(envelope-from <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
	id 1tnArx-0008hT-2m
	for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org;
	Wed, 26 Feb 2025 06:26:13 +0000
Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 51Q6Q9gb1716557;
	Wed, 26 Feb 2025 01:26:09 -0500
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Richard Guo <guofenglinux@gmail.com>
cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>,
        Ronald Cruz <cruz@rentec.com>, pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org,
        Peter Ford <pford@rentec.com>, "Aaron J. Garcia" <agarcia@rentec.com>
Subject: Re: Query result differences between PostgreSQL 17 vs 16
In-reply-to: 
 <CAMbWs49rShAwK0sMz+-6d9hGd1RsRQd0tBuVUGvh88pNu9hG1w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <f5320d3d-77af-4ce8-b9c3-4715ff33f213@rentec.com>
 <Z7kGplh70wbeX9su@momjian.us> <3736132.1740181858@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CAMbWs4_A=DFhTHQvbtCXpzs7OBGb0HcNX-yDsf01chVP60D9EQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3818495.1740191559@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CAMbWs4_BCC8+4PqJi2NcO5WTu5vsJPMh7iAe7e=nXNVTZNp+LQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMbWs49rShAwK0sMz+-6d9hGd1RsRQd0tBuVUGvh88pNu9hG1w@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Richard Guo <guofenglinux@gmail.com>
	message dated "Wed, 26 Feb 2025 15:14:25 +0900"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <1716555.1740551169.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2025 01:26:09 -0500
Message-ID: <1716556.1740551169@sss.pgh.pa.us>
List-Id: <pgsql-bugs.lists.postgresql.org>
List-Help: <https://lists.postgresql.org/manage/>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.postgresql.org/manage/>
List-Post: <mailto:pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org>
List-Owner: <mailto:pgsql-bugs-owner@lists.postgresql.org>
List-Archive: <https://www.postgresql.org/list/pgsql-bugs>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/1716556.1740551169%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Richard Guo <guofenglinux@gmail.com> writes:
> Here is the patch.

Thanks for that.  The code and comment added to
restriction_is_always_true look good, but I can't help wondering
whether we don't need the same in restriction_is_always_false.
Not very sure what a query proving the need for that would
look like, but leaving it asymmetric feels wrong.

			regards, tom lane