On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 10:40 AM amul sul <sulamul@gmail.com> wrote:
All the places from where this handle_missing_partition() get called
have the following code to decide the value for missing_side_outer/_inner which
I yet to understand. Do you think this has some flaw?
/*
* For a FULL join, inner relation acts as both OUTER and INNER
* relation. For LEFT and ANTI join the inner relation acts as
* INNER relation. For INNER and SEMI join OUTER and INNER
* differentiation is immaterial.
*/
missing_side_inner = (jointype == JOIN_FULL ||
jointype == JOIN_LEFT ||
jointype == JOIN_ANTI);
missing_side_outer = (jointype == JOIN_FULL);
I was wrong, sorry. The comment says it all.
argument value which fails to set merged_index.
In the attached patch, I tried to fix this case by setting merged_index
explicitly which fixes the reported crash.
I expect handle_missing_partition() to set the merged_index always. In your patches, I don't see that function in your patches is setting it explicitly. If we are setting merged_index explicitly somewhere else, other places may miss that explicit assignment. So it's better to move it inside this function.
Ok, that can be fixed.
Similarly, I think merge_null_partitions should set null_index instead of
asserting when null partitions missing from both the side, make sense?
I think not. null_index, once set shouldn't change and hence does not change with each pair of partitions being matched. So, it makes sense to make sure that null_index remains invalid if none of the tables have null partition.
