Re: BUG #17975: Nested Loop Index Scan returning wrong result
От
David Rowley
Тема
Re: BUG #17975: Nested Loop Index Scan returning wrong result
Дата
Msg-id
CAApHDvovtq_G-R+++37xHW0LMhmMGkow7cjY6xwxZ8CLUS=HJg@mail.gmail.com
Ответ на
Список
Дерево обсуждения
BUG #17975: Nested Loop Index Scan returning wrong result PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org>
Re: BUG #17975: Nested Loop Index Scan returning wrong result Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Re: BUG #17975: Nested Loop Index Scan returning wrong result Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Re: BUG #17975: Nested Loop Index Scan returning wrong result Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Re: BUG #17975: Nested Loop Index Scan returning wrong result Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: BUG #17975: Nested Loop Index Scan returning wrong result Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Re: BUG #17975: Nested Loop Index Scan returning wrong result Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: BUG #17975: Nested Loop Index Scan returning wrong result Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Re: BUG #17975: Nested Loop Index Scan returning wrong result David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>
Re: BUG #17975: Nested Loop Index Scan returning wrong result Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: BUG #17975: Nested Loop Index Scan returning wrong result David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>
Re: BUG #17975: Nested Loop Index Scan returning wrong result Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: BUG #17975: Nested Loop Index Scan returning wrong result David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>
Re: BUG #17975: Nested Loop Index Scan returning wrong result David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>
Re: BUG #17975: Nested Loop Index Scan returning wrong result David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>
Re: BUG #17975: Nested Loop Index Scan returning wrong result Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
Re: BUG #17975: Nested Loop Index Scan returning wrong result Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Re: BUG #17975: Nested Loop Index Scan returning wrong result Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
On Thu, 15 Jun 2023 at 12:28, Tom Lane wrote: > I concur that we'd better just not use partial indexes in > relation_has_unique_index_for. I wonder if that's ok for a backpatch. This affects both left join removals and unique joins. Seems like suddenly making a left join removal not work might cause someone some pain. Is it worth trying to jam in a new boolean field into IndexOptInfo into some spare padding to that we run predicate_implied_by() just using baserestrictinfo and use those in relation_has_unique_index_for()? One problem might be that I don't see anywhere we could jam another boolean into IndexOptInfo on 32-bit builds. Maybe we could put it at the end given that we should only be making these structs in core? David
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления
От: Tom Lane
Дата: