Re: Identity projection
Amit Kapila <amit.kapila@huawei.com>
From: Amit kapila <amit.kapila@huawei.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: "hlinnaka@iki.fi" <hlinnaka@iki.fi>, "'Kyotaro HORIGUCHI'" <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp>, "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2013-02-10T05:40:44Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Saturday, February 09, 2013 9:03 AM Tom Lane wrote: Amit kapila <amit.kapila@huawei.com> writes: >>> if (!is_projection_capable_plan(result_plan) && compare_tlist_exprs(sub_tlist, result_plan->targetlist) ) >> Sorry, the check I suggested in last mail should be as below: >> if (!is_projection_capable_plan(result_plan) && !compare_tlist_exprs(sub_tlist, result_plan->targetlist) ) > You know, I was thinking that compare_tlist_exprs() was a pretty > unhelpfully-chosen name for a function returning boolean, and this > thinko pretty much proves the point. It'd be better to call it > something like equivalent_tlists(), tlists_are_equivalent(), etc. > (I'm not caring for the emphasis on the exprs either, because I think > it'll also be necessary to compare resjunk fields for instance.) The fields which cannot be compared are resname, resorigtbl, resorigcol as these gets cleared in planner. I am not sure about fields resno and ressortgroupref, but I will check in more detail before sending patch. With Regards, Amit Kapila.