On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 1:55 PM Richard Guo wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 7:33 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> We might want to see if we can devise a new example (or wait for
>> Robins to break it ;-)) before expending a lot of effort on making
>> the commute_xxx bits more precise.
>
>
> Here is an
On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 7:33 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> We might want to see if we can devise a new example (or wait for
> Robins to break it ;-)) before expending a lot of effort on making
> the commute_xxx bits more precise.
Here is an example that can trigger the same assertion as in bug #17781
wit
I wrote:
> Richard Guo writes:
>> In b448f1c8 remove_useless_result_rtes will remove useless FromExprs and
>> merge its quals up to parent. This makes flag 'delay_upper_joins' not
>> necessary any more if the clauses between the two outer joins come from
>> FromExprs. However, if the clauses bet
Richard Guo writes:
> In cases where we have any clauses between two outer joins, these
> clauses should be treated as degenerate clauses in the upper OJ, and
> they may prevent us from re-ordering the two outer joins. Previously we
> have the flag 'delay_upper_joins' to help avoid the re-orderin
