Re: MergeAppend could consider sorting cheapest child path
От | Andrei Lepikhov |
---|---|
Тема | Re: MergeAppend could consider sorting cheapest child path |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 33a72b35-2701-4328-ab26-5635941a4f94@gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: MergeAppend could consider sorting cheapest child path (Alexander Pyhalov <a.pyhalov@postgrespro.ru>) |
Ответы |
Re: MergeAppend could consider sorting cheapest child path
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 7/5/2025 08:57, Alexander Pyhalov wrote: > Andrei Lepikhov писал(а) 2025-05-07 08:02: >> On 5/5/2025 15:56, Alexander Pyhalov wrote: >>> Andrei Lepikhov писал(а) 2025-05-05 14:38: >>> Also logic a bit differs if path is NULL. In >>> get_cheapest_path_for_pathkeys_ext() we explicitly check for path >>> being NULL, in get_cheapest_fractional_path_for_pathkeys_ext() only >>> after calculating sort cost. >>> >>> I've tried to fix comments a bit and unified functions definitions. >> Generally seems ok, I'm not a native speaker to judge the comments. But: >> if (base_path && path != base_path) >> >> What is the case in your mind where the base_path pointer still may be >> null at that point? > > Hi. > > It seems if some childrel doesn't have valid pathlist, subpaths_valid > would be false in add_paths_to_append_rel() > and generate_orderedappend_paths() will not be called. So when we > iterate over live_childrels, > all of them will have cheapest_total path. This is why we can assert > that base_path is not NULL. I'm not sure I understand you correctly. Under which conditions will rel->cheapest_total_path be set to NULL for a childrel? Could you provide an example? -- regards, Andrei Lepikhov
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: