Re: MergeJoin beats HashJoin in the case of multiple hash clauses - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tender Wang
Subject Re: MergeJoin beats HashJoin in the case of multiple hash clauses
Date
Msg-id CAHewXN=+Dzrtjre7Ykj8GmUD_UZvHee_SPO9vzVLHOeZFwYZbw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: MergeJoin beats HashJoin in the case of multiple hash clauses  ("Lepikhov Andrei" <a.lepikhov@postgrespro.ru>)
List pgsql-hackers


Andrei Lepikhov <lepihov@gmail.com> 于2025年7月3日周四 17:23写道:
On 3/7/2025 04:02, Tender Wang wrote:
>
>
> Andrei Lepikhov <lepihov@gmail.com <mailto:lepihov@gmail.com>> 于2025年7
> 月2日周三 22:29写道:
>
>     On 30/6/2025 04:38, Tender Wang wrote:
>      >     Do you think it's worth doing this?
>      >
>      >
>      > Hi all,
>      >
>      > I have added this patch to commitfest[1]. I'm hoping someone can
>     review
>      > it for me.
>     It makes sense to apply. If you return the comment to its place, you
>     may
>     reduce the patch size even more.
>
>
> Thanks for reviewing. I returned the comment to its place. Please review
> the attached patch.
Do you really need to initialise clauses with the NIL value? I guess, it
may be avoided because later you non-alternatively init it with a copy
of hash clauses.

Yeah, no need to initialize clauses to NIL. 

--
Thanks,
Tender Wang

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: shveta malik
Date:
Subject: Re: Logical Replication of sequences
Next
From: Álvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: CREATE DOMAIN create two not null constraints