RE: Add Nullif case for eval_const_expressions_mutator - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Hou, Zhijie
Subject RE: Add Nullif case for eval_const_expressions_mutator
Date
Msg-id ab53b3dbdbd6436f970f33b51ccd7dd3@G08CNEXMBPEKD05.g08.fujitsu.local
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Add Nullif case for eval_const_expressions_mutator  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: Add Nullif case for eval_const_expressions_mutator  (David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hi

Thanks for the review.

> It's a bit unfortunate now that between OpExpr, DistinctExpr, NullIfExpr,
> and to a lesser extent ScalarArrayOpExpr we will now have several different
> implementations of nearly the same thing, without any explanation why one
> approach was chosen here and another there.  We should at least document
> this.

I am not quiet sure where to document the difference.
Temporarily, I tried to add some comments for the Nullif to explain why this one is different.

+                /*
+                 * Since NullIf is not common enough to deserve specially
+                 * optimized code, use ece_generic_processing and
+                 * ece_evaluate_expr to simplify the code as much as possible.
+                 */

Any suggestions ?

> Some inconsistencies I found: The code for DistinctExpr calls
> expression_tree_mutator() directly, but your code for NullIfExpr calls
> ece_generic_processing(), even though the explanation in the comment for
> DistinctExpr would apply there as well.
>
> Your code for NullIfExpr doesn't appear to call set_opfuncid() anywhere.

IMO, we will call set_opfuncid in function ece_evaluate_expr.

Like the following flow:
    ece_evaluate_expr-->evaluate_expr--> fix_opfuncids--> fix_opfuncids_walker--> set_opfuncid

And we do not need the opfuncid till we call ece_evaluate_expr.
So, to simplify the code as much as possible, I did not call set_opfuncid in eval_const_expressions_mutator again.


> I would move your new block for NullIfExpr after the block for DistinctExpr.
> That's the order in which these blocks appear elsewhere for generic node
> processing.
>

Changed.


> Check your whitespace usage:
>
>      if(!has_nonconst_input)
>
> should have a space after the "if".  (It's easy to fix of course, but I
> figure I'd point it out here since you have submitted several patches with
> this style, so it's perhaps a habit to break.)

Changed.


> Perhaps add a comment to the tests like this so it's clear what they are
> for:
>
> diff --git a/src/test/regress/sql/case.sql
> b/src/test/regress/sql/case.sql index 4742e1d0e0..98e3fb8de5 100644
> --- a/src/test/regress/sql/case.sql
> +++ b/src/test/regress/sql/case.sql
> @@ -137,6 +137,7 @@ CREATE TABLE CASE2_TBL (
>     FROM CASE_TBL a, CASE2_TBL b
>     WHERE COALESCE(f,b.i) = 2;
>
> +-- Tests for constant subexpression simplification
>   explain (costs off)
>   SELECT * FROM CASE_TBL WHERE NULLIF(1, 2) = 2;

Added.

Attatching v3 patch, please consider it for further review.

Best regards,
houzj




Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: New IndexAM API controlling index vacuum strategies
Next
From: "tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com"
Date:
Subject: RE: Parallel INSERT (INTO ... SELECT ...)