Re: EquivalenceClasses and subqueries and PlaceHolderVars, oh my
Yeb Havinga <yebhavinga@gmail.com>
From: Yeb Havinga <yebhavinga@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
Date: 2012-03-15T09:16:03Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Fix pushing of index-expression qualifications through UNION ALL.
- b28ffd0fcc58 9.2.0 cited
-
Wrap appendrel member outputs in PlaceHolderVars in additional cases.
- 57664ed25e5d 9.2.0 cited
On 2012-03-15 02:29, Tom Lane wrote: > > explain select * from > (select thousand as t1, tenthous as t2 from tenk1 a > union all > select 42 as t1, 42 as t2 from tenk1 b) c > order by t1, t2; > > There is an EquivalenceClass for each of "t1" and "t2", and if we don't > do something like wrapping the constants with distinct PHVs, then > add_child_rel_equivalences will end up pushing identical constants into > both ECs, thus totally bollixing the fundamental rule that any expression > should match at most one EC. I'm having a hard time imagining that add_child_rel_equivalences is not just plain wrong. Even though it will only add child equivalence members to a parent eq class when certain conditions are met, isn't it the case that since a union (all) is addition of tuples and not joining, any kind of propagating restrictions on a append rel child member to other areas of the plan can cause unwanted results, like the ones currently seen? regards, Yeb Havinga