Re: Pathify RHS unique-ification for semijoin planning - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Richard Guo
Subject Re: Pathify RHS unique-ification for semijoin planning
Date
Msg-id CAMbWs4-F4twP0ZPYB7kn3RLYKfuYu04z2HJwUaxS8_nQr5pTuQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Pathify RHS unique-ification for semijoin planning  (Richard Guo <guofenglinux@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 10:43 AM Richard Guo <guofenglinux@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 4, 2025 at 11:08 AM Richard Guo <guofenglinux@gmail.com> wrote:
> > The v5 patch does not apply anymore, and here is a new rebase.  There
> > are two main changes in v6:
> >
> > * I choose to use the check I proposed earlier to determine whether a
> > relation has been unique-ified in costsize.c.
> >
> > * Now that the only call to relation_has_unique_index_for() that
> > supplied an exprlist and oprlist has been removed, the loop handling
> > those lists is effectively dead code.  0002 removes that loop and
> > simplifies the function accordingly.

> Does anyone plan to review this patch further?  I intend to push it in
> two weeks unless there are any objections or additional comments.

Here's the updated version of the patch, which renames the macro
IS_UNIQUEIFIED_REL to RELATION_WAS_MADE_UNIQUE, and includes some
comment updates as well.  I plan to push it soon, barring any
objections.

This patch removes the last call to make_sort_from_sortclauses(), so
I'm wondering if we can safely remove the function itself.  Or should
we keep it around in case it's used by extensions or might be needed
in the future?

Thanks
Richard

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: David Rowley
Date:
Subject: Re: Compilation issues for HASH_STATISTICS and HASH_DEBUG options
Next
From: David Rowley
Date:
Subject: Re: max_locks_per_transaction v18