Re: [HACKERS] don't know whether nodes of type 719 are equal - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [HACKERS] don't know whether nodes of type 719 are equal
Date
Msg-id 21990.940220172@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] don't know whether nodes of type 719 are equal  (Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] don't know whether nodes of type 719 are equal  (Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> My recollection is that cnfify is not called to simplify, but was
> required at one point so you got the right output.  That may no longer
> be the case, but I know it was at some point.

For ordinary qual expressions, the only thing cnfify does that is
actually *necessary* for downstream processing is that it changes
the top-level boolean condition into an implicitly-ANDed list of
clauses.  That is, (AND A B ...) becomes (A B ...), anything else
becomes a singleton list ((X)).  So you could replace cnfify with
make_ands_implicit() and things would still work.  (I believe
Peter Andrews is presently getting useful work done with cnfify
lobotomized in more or less that fashion --- he's using queries
that expand unpleasantly with normal cnfify.)

I am not sure whether this is true for UNION/INTERSECT processing
though.  There are some really ugly kluges in UNION/INTERSECT, and
I don't think I understand all of its dependencies.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] don't know whether nodes of type 719 are equal
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] don't know whether nodes of type 719 are equal