From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: "Ken McClaren" <ken.mcclaren@kipuhealth.com>
cc: "Wetmore, Matthew (CTR)" <Matthew.Wetmore@express-scripts.com>,
        "pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org" <pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org>,
        John Hall <john.hall@kipuhealth.com>
Subject: Re: Order of operations in postgreSQL.
In-reply-to: 
 <SJ0PR04MB75994DC45BDB0159CA120278F9499@SJ0PR04MB7599.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
References: 
 <SJ0PR04MB7599D1DD3E866CF2D2F42012F9489@SJ0PR04MB7599.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
 <668989cd22e8457ca7a85d0e74c34bde@express-scripts.com>
 <SJ0PR04MB75994DC45BDB0159CA120278F9499@SJ0PR04MB7599.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Comments: In-reply-to "Ken McClaren" <ken.mcclaren@kipuhealth.com>
	message dated "Thu, 01 Jun 2023 00:21:01 -0000"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <3844.1685627497.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2023 09:51:37 -0400
Message-ID: <3845.1685627497@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/3845.1685627497%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

"Ken  McClaren" <ken.mcclaren@kipuhealth.com> writes:
> Yes, the error is correct, but it should never have occurred.
> The join should have eliminated the error condition before it was evalua=
ted by the where clause. That is the case when this type of statement is e=
xecuted in SQL Server.

Postgres does not promise that JOIN conditions are evaluated before WHERE
conditions.  I rather doubt that SQL Server does either, because it'd
cripple performance for a lot of real-world queries.

If you need something like that, you should restructure the query into two
levels with an optimization fence between them.  One way is

   SELECT ... FROM
     (SELECT ... FROM t1 JOIN t2 ON join-condition OFFSET 0) ss
   WHERE risky-where-condition

			regards, tom lane