Hi! Thank you for the review!
On 28.09.2026 18:56, Ilia Evdokimov wrote:
> Hi Alena,
>
> Thanks for v8. The walker is much easier to follow now, and all of
> Peter's points look addressed to me.
>
> I compared the results of random EXISTS/NOT EXISTS queries with and
> without the pull-up (adding OFFSET 0 to the sub-select blocks it). The
> queries had nested inner and outer joins in the sub-select, correlated
> and uncorrelated quals in the ON clauses, and NULLs in the data. About
> 13.5k queries ran, and about 1250 of them go through the new code
> path. I found no wrong results and no assertion failures, so the
> approach looks correct to me.
Thank you for testing! I haven't found any issues either during Smith's
test or in a one-hour SQLancer run.
>
> My main comment is about the regression tests. A few things are
> missing in the regression tests:
>
> 1. anti join cases
> 2. query results not only EXPLAIN output
> 3. An EXISTS sublink in the ON clause of an outer join in the parent
> query, where the moved qual interacts with the available_rels check.
>
Agreed and added tests. Thanks!
--
Regards,
Alena Rybakina
Yandex
