Re: postgres_fdw: wrong results with self join + enable_nestloop off

From: Etsuro Fujita <etsuro(dot)fujita(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Nishant Sharma <nishant(dot)sharma(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: postgres_fdw: wrong results with self join + enable_nestloop off
Date: 2023-04-14 12:50:55
Message-ID: CAPmGK14uJJZ8s4pKjF9M-iU_YM5AoGG=p_0g-7MhF9aVdqtQDQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi Nishant,

On Fri, Apr 14, 2023 at 8:39 PM Nishant Sharma
<nishant(dot)sharma(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> I debugged this issue and was able to find a fix for the same. Kindly please refer to the attached fix. With the fix I am able to resolve the issue.

Thanks for the report and patch!

> What is the technical issue?
> The problem here is the use of extract_actual_clauses. Because of which the plan creation misses adding the second condition of AND i.e "now() < '23-Feb-2020'::timestamp" in the plan. Because it is not considered a pseudo constant and extract_actual_clause is passed with false as the second parameter and it gets skipped from the list. As a result that condition is never taken into consideration as either one-time filter (before or after) or part of SQL remote execution
>
> Why do I think the fix is correct?
> The fix is simple, where we have created a new function similar to extract_actual_clause which just extracts all the conditions from the list with no checks and returns the list to the caller. As a result all conditions would be taken into consideration in the query plan.

I think that the root cause for this issue would be in the
create_scan_plan handling of pseudoconstant quals when creating a
foreign-join (or custom-join) plan. Anyway, I will look at your patch
closely, first.

Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Drouvot, Bertrand 2023-04-14 13:22:26 Re: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby
Previous Message Thomas Munro 2023-04-14 12:46:09 Re: OOM in hash join