Re: Removing unneeded self joins

From: Andrei Lepikhov <a(dot)lepikhov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
To: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "Gregory Stark (as CFM)" <stark(dot)cfm(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michał Kłeczek <michal(at)kleczek(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Removing unneeded self joins
Date: 2023-10-05 09:17:08
Message-ID: 48c11b23-9c23-440e-9a3c-020e05196449@postgrespro.ru
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 4/10/2023 14:34, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> > Relid replacement machinery is the most contradictory code here. We used
> > a utilitarian approach and implemented a simplistic variant.
>
> > > 2) It would be nice to skip the insertion of IS NOT NULL checks when
> > > they are not necessary.  [1] points that infrastructure from [2] might
> > > be useful.  The patchset from [2] seems committed mow.  However, I
> > > can't see it is directly helpful in this matter.  Could we just skip
> > > adding IS NOT NULL clause for the columns, that have
> > > pg_attribute.attnotnull set?
> > Thanks for the links, I will look into that case.
To be more precise, in the attachment, you can find a diff to the main
patch, which shows the volume of changes to achieve the desired behaviour.
Some explains in regression tests shifted. So, I've made additional tests:

DROP TABLE test CASCADE;
CREATE TABLE test (a int, b int not null);
CREATE UNIQUE INDEX abc ON test(b);
explain SELECT * FROM test t1 JOIN test t2 ON (t1.a=t2.a)
WHERE t1.b=t2.b;
CREATE UNIQUE INDEX abc1 ON test(a,b);
explain SELECT * FROM test t1 JOIN test t2 ON (t1.a=t2.a)
WHERE t1.b=t2.b;
explain SELECT * FROM test t1 JOIN test t2 ON (t1.a=t2.a)
WHERE t1.b=t2.b AND (t1.a=t2.a OR t2.a=t1.a);
DROP INDEX abc1;
explain SELECT * FROM test t1 JOIN test t2 ON (t1.a=t2.a)
WHERE t1.b=t2.b AND (t1.b=t2.b OR t2.b=t1.b);

We have almost the results we wanted to have. But in the last explain
you can see that nothing happened with the OR clause. We should use the
expression mutator instead of walker to handle such clauses. But It
doesn't process the RestrictInfo node ... I'm inclined to put a solution
of this issue off for a while.

--
regards,
Andrey Lepikhov
Postgres Professional

Attachment Content-Type Size
check_attnotnull.diff text/plain 14.2 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Laurenz Albe 2023-10-05 09:22:01 Re: Good News Everyone! + feature proposal
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2023-10-05 09:13:54 Re: pgsql: Some refactoring to export json(b) conversion functions