Amit Kapila <amit.kapila@huawei.com> writes:
> For this kind of query, currently (referring 9.0.3 code) also it considers
> join of b,c and b,d.
> As there is no join clause between b,c,d so it will go in path of
> make_rels_by_clauseless_joins() where it considers join of b,c and b,d.
> In this kind of query, if the suggestion by me in below mail is followed,
> then it will consider joining a,b a,c a,d at level-2 in function
> make_rels_by_clause_joins() which it currently doesn't do which may generate
> useless join paths.
> However in real-world scenario's this kind of queries where 2 cols of
> different tables are
> used in one side expression (b.y + c.z) of where clause may be less.
> On the other hand, when we come to consider d, it will have no join
> clauses so we will consider joining it to each other rel in turn.
> When it come to consider d, as at level -2 it only consider later rels. So
> it should not consider joining with each other rel.
I might still be misunderstanding, but I think what you are suggesting
is that in the loop in make_rels_by_clause_joins, if we find that the
old_rel doesn't have a join clause/restriction with the current
other_rel, we check to see whether other_rel has any join clauses at
all, and force the join to occur anyway if it doesn't.
I can't really get excited about doing it that way instead of the
current way. In the first place, it seems to miss the need to
clauseless-join two relations when neither of them have any join
clauses, for instance plain old "SELECT * FROM a, b". So you still need
something like the make_rels_by_clauseless_joins code path, and it's
not entirely clear how to avoid duplicated work there. In the second
place, instead of N tests to see whether a rel lacks any join clauses,
we'd now have something approaching O(N^2) such tests, in the typical
case where most base rels are directly joined to only a few other rels.
So it seems to make things slower for little obvious benefit.
In general, queries with join-clause-less rels are pretty uncommon,
so I don't want to introduce extra work into make_rels_by_clause_joins
to handle the case.
regards, tom lane
