Re: Replace IN VALUES with ANY in WHERE clauses during optimization
Alena Rybakina <a.rybakina@postgrespro.ru>
From: Alena Rybakina <a.rybakina@postgrespro.ru>
To: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>
Cc: Andrei Lepikhov <lepihov@gmail.com>, Ivan Kush
<ivan.kush@tantorlabs.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>,
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>
Date: 2025-03-12T18:11:24Z
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 →
-
Stabilize regression test from c0962a113.
- 3ba2cdaa4541 18.0 landed
-
Convert 'x IN (VALUES ...)' to 'x = ANY ...' then appropriate
- c0962a113d1f 18.0 landed
-
Extract make_SAOP_expr() function from match_orclause_to_indexcol()
- d48d2e2dc8be 18.0 landed
Hi, Alexander! On 06.03.2025 11:23, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > Hi, Alena! > > On Sat, Mar 1, 2025 at 1:39 PM Alena Rybakina<a.rybakina@postgrespro.ru> wrote: >> On 09.02.2025 18:38, Alexander Korotkov wrote: >>> Also, aren't we too restrictive while requiring is_simple_values_sequence()? >>> For instance, I believe cases like this (containing Var) could be transformed too. >>> >>> select * from t t1, lateral (select * from t t2 where t2.i in (values (t1.i), (1))); >> I added it and attached a patch with diff file. To be honest, I didn't find queries except for var with volatile functions where the transform can't be applied. >> >> I removed the function volatility check that I added in the previous version, since we already check it in is_simple_values_sequence. >> >> I'm not sure about only cases where var can refer to something outside available_rels list but I couldn't come up with an example where that's possible, what do you think? >> >> Considering it again, I think we can't face problems like that because we don't work with join. >> >> I attached a diff file as a difference with the 3rd version of the patch, when we did not consider the values with var for transformation. > I take detailed look at makeSAOPArrayExpr() function, which is much > more complex than corresponding fragment from > match_orclause_to_indexcol(). And I found it to be mostly wrong. We > are working in post parse-analyze stage. That means it's too late to > do type coercion or lookup operator by name. We have already all the > catalog objects nailed down. In connection with that, second argument > of OpExpr shouldn't be ignored as it might contain amrelevant type > cast. I think I've fixed the most of them problems in the attached > patchset. > > I agree with your conclusion and changes. -- Regards, Alena Rybakina Postgres Professional