public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
To: Richard Guo <[email protected]>
Cc: Pg Hackers <[email protected]>
Cc: Finnerty, Jim <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Making Vars outer-join aware
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2022 10:09:23 -0400
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMbWs4_va6UWcaiPSZpeRPFzpA=UKU+4zKkxqdfrcKoKA5nKWA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <[email protected]>
<CAMbWs49KZO2VvMqo+1MQfaX4cun7vhF=5RgVdpA0gjJcj77HFQ@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<CAMbWs4-0cdVpgY0c2uULBCX2vPjQt3Fx3=XFZh-Mn=UWmxhG-A@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAMbWs4_va6UWcaiPSZpeRPFzpA=UKU+4zKkxqdfrcKoKA5nKWA@mail.gmail.com>
Richard Guo <[email protected]> writes:
> But I'm not sure which is better, to evaluate the expression below or
> above the outer join. It seems to me that if the size of base rel is
> large and somehow the size of the joinrel is small, evaluation above the
> outer join would win. And in the opposite case evaluation below the
> outer join would be better.
Reasonable question. But I think for the purposes of this patch,
it's better to keep the old behavior as much as we can. People
have probably relied on it while tuning queries. (I'm not saying
it has to be *exactly* bug-compatible, but simple cases like your
example probably should work the same.)
regards, tom lane
view thread (42+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: Making Vars outer-join aware
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox