Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> OK, I think I see the problem here. predicate_implied_by() and
> predicate_refuted_by() differ in what they assume about the predicate
> evaluating to NULL, but both of them assume that if the clause
> evaluates to NULL, that's equivalent to false. So there's actually no
> option to get the behavior we want here, which is to treat both
> operands using CHECK-semantics (null is true) rather than
> WHERE-semantics (null is false).
> Given that, Ashutosh's proposal of passing an additional flag to
> predicate_implied_by() seems like the best option. Here's a patch
> implementing that.
I've not reviewed the logic changes in predtest.c in detail, but
I think this is a reasonable direction to go in. Two suggestions:
1. predicate_refuted_by() should grow the extra argument at the
same time. There's no good reason to be asymmetric.
2. It might be clearer, and would certainly be shorter, to call the
extra argument something like "null_is_true".
regards, tom lane
