X-Original-To: pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org
Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.2])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C531ED1DB5B
	for <pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Mon,  8 Mar 2004 16:04:53 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (neptune.hub.org [200.46.204.2]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 37864-04
	for <pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Mon,  8 Mar 2004 12:04:51 -0400 (AST)
Received: from amigos44.diku.dk (amigos44.diku.dk [192.38.109.174])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2167D1DB35
	for <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>;
	Mon,  8 Mar 2004 12:04:50 -0400 (AST)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=diku.dk ident=davh)
	by amigos44.diku.dk with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian))
	id 1B0NFJ-0006CH-00; Mon, 08 Mar 2004 17:04:49 +0100
Message-ID: <404C99A0.7050808@diku.dk>
Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 17:04:48 +0100
From: Dennis Haney <davh@diku.dk>
Organization: Datalogisk Institut =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F8benhavns_Universit?=
	=?ISO-8859-1?Q?et?=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US;
	rv:1.6) Gecko/20040122 Debian/1.6-1
X-Accept-Language: da
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: IN joining
References: <4048B8D6.70401@diku.dk> <11205.1078520699@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<4048F1D3.20405@diku.dk> <12170.1078528135@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<404C7D3C.50908@diku.dk> <4062.1078760645@sss.pgh.pa.us>
In-Reply-To: <4062.1078760645@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at postgresql.org
X-Archive-Number: 200403/257
X-Sequence-Number: 50849

Tom Lane wrote:

[SNIP: a repetion of my first post ;) ]

>I think it should be
>
>            /*
>             * If we already joined IN's RHS to anything else in
>             * either input path, then this join is not constrained (the
>             * necessary work was done at a lower level).
>             */
>            if (bms_is_subset(ininfo->righthand, rel1->relids) &&
>                !bms_equal(ininfo->righthand, rel1->relids))
>                continue;
>            if (bms_is_subset(ininfo->righthand, rel2->relids) &&
>                !bms_equal(ininfo->righthand, rel2->relids))
>                continue;
>
>Comments?
>  
>
It's good.
It was pretty much what I was thinking was wrong to begin with.
Whether the generated plans are valid is a different issue ;)

-- 
Dennis