From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
cc: krujkov@gmail.com,
        PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: BUG #15857: Parallel Hash Join makes join instead of exists
In-reply-to: 
 <CA+hUKGKcPcayiknzwx5BAo41cs-ymtLk6b8Ebg7fjXsVMvmcUQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <15857-d1ba2a64bce0795e@postgresql.org>
 <CA+hUKGLEAYVfd6O=6TRx6e3sJLZwHmPJ=gyJCaMTgixbtvSOFw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+hUKG+AT83m_r_N-StwcTC4p5U0ZH12SCbmOn2E54p9aWKiTg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+hUKGKcPcayiknzwx5BAo41cs-ymtLk6b8Ebg7fjXsVMvmcUQ@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
	message dated "Tue, 18 Jun 2019 23:17:07 +1200"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <20971.1560863822.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2019 09:17:02 -0400
Message-ID: <20972.1560863822@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> writes:
> Here's a tidier version with a comment and commit message.

It seems a little weird to make the join-type test be the first one
in the if() condition: it doesn't seem like the most important thing
to test, and it doesn't agree with the way you've worded the comment.
Otherwise +1.

			regards, tom lane