Re: join removal
Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine@hi-media.com>
From: Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine@hi-media.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu>, "<pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2010-03-29T06:54:19Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
reducejoins.c ? flattenjoins.c ? filterjoins.c ? -- dim Le 28 mars 2010 à 22:12, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> a écrit : > Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: >> On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 2:10 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> joinremoval.c ? > >> Maybe, except as I mentioned in the email linked upthread, my plan >> for >> implementing inner join removal would also include allowing join >> reordering in cases where we currently don't. So I don't want to >> sandbox it too tightly as join removal, per se, though that's >> certainly what we have on the table ATM. It's more like advanced >> open-heart join-tree surgery - like prepjointree, but much later in >> the process. > > Hm. At this point we're not really working with a join *tree* in any > case --- the data structure we're mostly concerned with is the list of > SpecialJoinInfo structs, and what we're trying to do is weaken the > constraints described by that list. So I'd rather stay away from > "tree" > terminology. > > planjoins.c would fit with other names in the plan/ directory but it > seems like a misnomer because we're not really "planning" any joins > at this stage. > > adjustjoins.c? loosenjoins.c? weakenjoins.c? > > regards, tom lane > > -- > Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers