From: | Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Subject: | Re: Improve hash join's handling of tuples with null join keys |
Date: | 2025-08-13 09:16:01 |
Message-ID: | 175507656113.993.1381684440543440253.pgcf@coridan.postgresql.org |
Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I downloaded the patch and tested all join types: inner, left, right, full, semi and anti. Basically my tests all passed. However, I didn't test any case of parallel query.
I have two nit comments:
1. In hashjoin.h, line 76-78, the added comment says "(In the unlikely but supported case of a non-strict join operator, we treat null keys as normal data.)". But I don't see where non-strict join is handled. So, how this patch impact non-strict joins?
2. Two new join states are added: HJ_FILL_OUTER_NULL_TUPLES, HJ_FILL_INNER_NULL_TUPLES. There are existing join states: HJ_FILL_OUTER_TUPLE and HJ_FILL_INNER_TUPLES. They all use "FILL". But I think that "FILL" in HJ_FILL_OUTER_NULL_TUPLES means different from in "HJ_FILL_OUTER_TUPLE". Because HJ_FILL_OUTER_TUPLE means that when returning an outer tuple, it needs to fill in null-extension of inner tables; while HJ_FILL_OUTER_NULL_TUPLES means to return outer tuples that have null join keys. I would suggest something like "APPEND" for the new states: HJ_APPEND_OUTER_NULL_TUPLES and HJ_APPEND_INNER_NULL_TUPLES.
The new status of this patch is: Waiting on Author
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Shlok Kyal | 2025-08-13 09:21:42 | Re: Skipping schema changes in publication |
Previous Message | Shinya Kato | 2025-08-13 08:52:45 | Re: Improve tab completion for various SET/RESET forms |