On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 at 11:42, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > David Rowley <dgrowle...@gmail.com> writes: > > I realised when working on something unrelated last night that we can > > also do hash lookups for NOT IN too. > > ... and still get the behavior right for nulls?
Yeah, it will. There are already some special cases for NULLs in the IN version. Those would need to be adapted for NOT IN. David
