On Thu, Jul 4, 2024 at 11:18 PM Japin Li wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Jul 2024 at 17:17, Richard Guo wrote:
> > Here is a new rebase.
> >
> > Barring objections, I'm planning to push it soon.
Pushed. Thanks for all the reviews.
> Thanks for updating the patch. It looks good to me, except for a minor
On Thu, 04 Jul 2024 at 17:17, Richard Guo wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 3:21 PM Richard Guo wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 2:54 PM Richard Guo wrote:
>> > I've refined this test case further to make it more stable by using an
>> > additional filter 'a.tenthous < 5000'. Besides, I noticed
Hi Richard Guo
Thank you for updating the patch.Tested on v8 , It looks good to me
Thanks
Richard Guo 于2024年7月4日周四 17:18写道：
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 3:21 PM Richard Guo
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 2:54 PM Richard Guo
> wrote:
> > > I've refined this test case further to make
On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 3:21 PM Richard Guo wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 2:54 PM Richard Guo wrote:
> > I've refined this test case further to make it more stable by using an
> > additional filter 'a.tenthous < 5000'. Besides, I noticed a surplus
> > blank line in ExecHashJoinImpl(). I've r
On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 2:54 PM Richard Guo wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 5:59 PM Richard Guo wrote:
> > I noticed that this patch changes the plan of a query in join.sql from
> > a semi join to right semi join, compromising the original purpose of
> > this query, which was to test the fix for
On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 5:59 PM Richard Guo wrote:
> I noticed that this patch changes the plan of a query in join.sql from
> a semi join to right semi join, compromising the original purpose of
> this query, which was to test the fix for neqjoinsel's behavior for
> semijoins (see commit 7ca25b7d)
Hi Japin Li
Thank you for your reviewing ,This way the notes are more accurate and
complete. Thanks also to the author for updating the patch ,I also tested
the new patch ,It looks good to me
Regrads
Japin Li 于2024年6月25日周二 08:51写道：
> On Mon, 24 Jun 2024 at 17:59, Richard Guo wrote:
> > T
On Mon, 24 Jun 2024 at 17:59, Richard Guo wrote:
> Thank you for reviewing.
>
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 1:27 PM Li Japin wrote:
>> + /*
>> +* For now we do not support RIGHT_SEMI join in mergejoin or nestloop
>> +* join.
>> +*/
>> + if (jointype == JOIN_RIGHT_S
Thank you for reviewing.
On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 1:27 PM Li Japin wrote:
> + /*
> +* For now we do not support RIGHT_SEMI join in mergejoin or nestloop
> +* join.
> +*/
> + if (jointype == JOIN_RIGHT_SEMI)
> + return;
> +
>
> How about adding some
Hi, Richard
> On Apr 25, 2024, at 11:28, Richard Guo wrote:
>
> Here is another rebase with a commit message to help review. I also
> tweaked some comments.
Thank you for updating the patch, here are some comments on the v5 patch.
+ /*
+* For now we do not support RIGHT_SEMI joi
Hi Richard
Thank you so much for your tireless work on this,I see the new version
of the patch improves some of the comments .I think it can commit in July
Thanks
On Thu, 25 Apr 2024 at 11:28, Richard Guo wrote:
> Here is another rebase with a commit message to help review. I also
> twea
Here is another rebase with a commit message to help review. I also
tweaked some comments.
Thanks
Richard
v5-0001-Support-Right-Semi-Join-plan-shapes.patch
Description: Binary data
On 06.03.2024 05:23, wenhui qiu wrote:
Hi Alena Rybakina
For merge join
+ /*
+ * For now we do not support RIGHT_SEMI join in mergejoin.
+ */
+ if (jointype == JOIN_RIGHT_SEMI)
+ {
+ *mergejoin_allowed = false;
+ return NIL;
+ }
Hi Alena Rybakina
For merge join
+ /*
+ * For now we do not support RIGHT_SEMI join in mergejoin.
+ */
+ if (jointype == JOIN_RIGHT_SEMI)
+ {
+ *mergejoin_allowed = false;
+ return NIL;
+ }
+
Tanks
On Wed, 6 Mar 2024 at 04:10, Alena Rybakina
wrote:
> To be honest, I didn't see it in the code, co
To be honest, I didn't see it in the code, could you tell me where they
are, please?
On 05.03.2024 05:44, Richard Guo wrote:
On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 2:51 PM Alena Rybakina
wrote:
I have reviewed your patch and I think it is better to add an
Assert for
JOIN_RIGHT_SEMI to the Exe
Hi Richard
Agree +1 ,I think can push now.
Richard
On Tue, 5 Mar 2024 at 10:44, Richard Guo wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 2:51 PM Alena Rybakina
> wrote:
>
>> I have reviewed your patch and I think it is better to add an Assert for
>> JOIN_RIGHT_SEMI to the ExecMergeJoin and ExecNest
On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 2:51 PM Alena Rybakina
wrote:
> I have reviewed your patch and I think it is better to add an Assert for
> JOIN_RIGHT_SEMI to the ExecMergeJoin and ExecNestLoop functions to
> prevent the use of RIGHT_SEMI for these types of connections (NestedLoop
> and MergeJoin).
Hmm,
On Mon, Mar 4, 2024 at 10:33 AM wenhui qiu wrote:
> HI Richard
> Now it is starting the last commitfest for v17, can you respond to
> Alena Rybakina points?
>
Thanks for reminding. Will do that soon.
Thanks
Richard
HI Richard
Now it is starting the last commitfest for v17, can you respond to
Alena Rybakina points?
Regards
On Thu, 8 Feb 2024 at 13:50, wenhui qiu wrote:
> Hi Alena Rybakina
> I saw this code snippet also disable mergejoin ,I think it same effect
> + /*
> + * For now we do not support
Hi Alena Rybakina
I saw this code snippet also disable mergejoin ,I think it same effect
+ /*
+ * For now we do not support RIGHT_SEMI join in mergejoin.
+ */
+ if (jointype == JOIN_RIGHT_SEMI)
+ {
+ *mergejoin_allowed = false;
+ return NIL;
+ }
+
Regards
Alena Rybakina 于2024年1月30日周二 14:51写道：
Hi! Thank you for your work on this subject.
I have reviewed your patch and I think it is better to add an Assert for
JOIN_RIGHT_SEMI to the ExecMergeJoin and ExecNestLoop functions to
prevent the use of RIGHT_SEMI for these types of connections (NestedLoop
and MergeJoin).
Mostly I'm suggestin
Hi vignesh C
Many thanks, I have marked it to "ready for committer"
Best wish
vignesh C 于2024年1月23日周二 10:56写道：
> On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 at 11:27, wenhui qiu wrote:
> >
> > Hi vignesh CI saw this path has been passed (
> https://cirrus-ci.com/build/6109321080078336),can we push it?
>
> I
On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 at 11:27, wenhui qiu wrote:
>
> Hi vignesh CI saw this path has been passed
> (https://cirrus-ci.com/build/6109321080078336),can we push it?
If you have found no comments from your review and testing, let's mark
it as "ready for committer".
Regards,
Vignesh
Hi vignesh CI saw this path has been passed (
https://cirrus-ci.com/build/6109321080078336),can we push it?
Best wish
Richard Guo 于2024年1月9日周二 18:49写道：
>
> On Sun, Jan 7, 2024 at 3:03 PM vignesh C wrote:
>
>> One of the tests in CFBot has failed at [1] with:
>> - Relations: (public.ft1
On Sun, Jan 7, 2024 at 3:03 PM vignesh C wrote:
> One of the tests in CFBot has failed at [1] with:
> - Relations: (public.ft1 t1) SEMI JOIN (public.ft2 t2)
> - Remote SQL: SELECT r1."C 1", r1.c2, r1.c3, r1.c4, r1.c5, r1.c6,
> r1.c7, r1.c8 FROM "S 1"."T 1" r1 WHERE ((r1."C 1" < 20)) AND EXIST
On Wed, 1 Nov 2023 at 11:25, Richard Guo wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 3:24 PM Richard Guo wrote:
>>
>> The cfbot reminds that this patch does not apply any more, so rebase it
>> to v2.
>
>
> Attached is another rebase over the latest master. Any feedback is
> appreciated.
One of the tes
Hi Richard Guo
I did a simple test ,Subqueries of type (in) can be supported, There
is a test sql that doesn't support it, and I think that's because it can't
pull up the subqueries.
```
test=# explain (costs off) SELECT t1.* FROM prt1_adv t1 WHERE EXISTS
(SELECT 1 FROM prt2_adv t2 WHERE t1.
Hi Richard Guo I see that the test samples are all (exists)
subqueries ,I think semi join should also support ( in) and ( any)
subqueries. would you do more test on ( in) and ( any) subqueries?
Best whish
On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 3:24 PM Richard Guo wrote:
> The cfbot reminds that this patch does not apply any more, so rebase it
> to v2.
>
Attached is another rebase over the latest master. Any feedback is
appreciated.
Thanks
Richard
v3-0001-Support-Right-Semi-Join-plan-shapes.patch
Description
On Tue, Apr 18, 2023 at 5:07 PM Richard Guo wrote:
> In thread [1] which discussed 'Right Anti Join', Tom once mentioned
> 'Right Semi Join'. After a preliminary investigation I think it is
> beneficial and can be implemented with very short change. With 'Right
> Semi Join', what we want to do
In thread [1] which discussed 'Right Anti Join', Tom once mentioned
'Right Semi Join'. After a preliminary investigation I think it is
beneficial and can be implemented with very short change. With 'Right
Semi Join', what we want to do is to just have the first match for each
inner tuple. For Ha
31 matches
Mail list logo
