Re: MergeJoin beats HashJoin in the case of multiple hash clauses - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrei Lepikhov
Subject Re: MergeJoin beats HashJoin in the case of multiple hash clauses
Date
Msg-id 2176c492-b671-409d-a2fb-0a37997befb1@gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: MergeJoin beats HashJoin in the case of multiple hash clauses  ("Lepikhov Andrei" <a.lepikhov@postgrespro.ru>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 3/7/2025 04:02, Tender Wang wrote:
> 
> 
> Andrei Lepikhov <lepihov@gmail.com <mailto:lepihov@gmail.com>> 于2025年7 
> 月2日周三 22:29写道:
> 
>     On 30/6/2025 04:38, Tender Wang wrote:
>      >     Do you think it's worth doing this?
>      >
>      >
>      > Hi all,
>      >
>      > I have added this patch to commitfest[1]. I'm hoping someone can
>     review
>      > it for me.
>     It makes sense to apply. If you return the comment to its place, you
>     may
>     reduce the patch size even more.
> 
> 
> Thanks for reviewing. I returned the comment to its place. Please review 
> the attached patch.
Do you really need to initialise clauses with the NIL value? I guess, it 
may be avoided because later you non-alternatively init it with a copy 
of hash clauses.

-- 
regards, Andrei Lepikhov



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andrei Lepikhov
Date:
Subject: Re: Reduce "Var IS [NOT] NULL" quals during constant folding
Next
From: Álvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: ALTER TABLE ALTER CONSTRAINT misleading error message