Re: Retire has_multiple_baserels()

On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 1:13 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> I thought this test wasn't too complete, because has_multiple_baserels
> isn't reached at all in many cases thanks to the way the calling if()
> is coded. I tried testing like this instead:
>
> diff --git a/src/backend/optimizer/path/allpaths.c
> b/src/backend/optimizer/path/allpaths.c
> index eea49cca7b..3f6fc51fb4 100644
> --- a/src/backend/optimizer/path/allpaths.c
> +++ b/src/backend/optimizer/path/allpaths.c
> @@ -2649,6 +2649,8 @@ set_subquery_pathlist(PlannerInfo *root, RelOptInfo
> *rel,
> */
> remove_unused_subquery_outputs(subquery, rel, run_cond_attrs);
>
> + Assert(has_multiple_baserels(root) ==
> (bms_membership(root->all_baserels) == BMS_MULTIPLE));
> +
> /*
> * We can safely pass the outer tuple_fraction down to the subquery
> if the
> * outer level has no joining, aggregation, or sorting to do.
> Otherwise
>
> and came to the same conclusion: check-world finds no cases where
> the assertion fails. So it LGTM too. Pushed.

Thanks for pushing!

Thanks
Richard