| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit kapila <amit(dot)kapila(at)huawei(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi" <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, "'Kyotaro HORIGUCHI'" <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Identity projection |
| Date: | 2013-02-09 03:33:13 |
| Message-ID: | 8465.1360380793@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Amit kapila <amit(dot)kapila(at)huawei(dot)com> writes:
>> if (!is_projection_capable_plan(result_plan) && compare_tlist_exprs(sub_tlist, result_plan->targetlist) )
> Sorry, the check I suggested in last mail should be as below:
> if (!is_projection_capable_plan(result_plan) && !compare_tlist_exprs(sub_tlist, result_plan->targetlist) )
You know, I was thinking that compare_tlist_exprs() was a pretty
unhelpfully-chosen name for a function returning boolean, and this
thinko pretty much proves the point. It'd be better to call it
something like equivalent_tlists(), tlists_are_equivalent(), etc.
(I'm not caring for the emphasis on the exprs either, because I think
it'll also be necessary to compare resjunk fields for instance.)
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2013-02-09 05:09:43 | Re: missing rename support |
| Previous Message | Amit kapila | 2013-02-09 02:49:41 | Re: Identity projection |