diff options
author | Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> | 2015-08-06 15:35:27 -0400 |
---|---|---|
committer | Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> | 2015-08-06 15:35:27 -0400 |
commit | 3e79144a848e9e65d248d252488a37678407d6b3 (patch) | |
tree | 23a4c4c674e1b6f7c9351f4e40eaad8e5e1a1782 /src/backend/executor | |
parent | 9bc4d5927c573d5fa5081b37feab06f07b7b5b2c (diff) |
Further fixes for degenerate outer join clauses.
Further testing revealed that commit f69b4b9495269cc4 was still a few
bricks shy of a load: minor tweaking of the previous test cases resulted
in the same wrong-outer-join-order problem coming back. After study
I concluded that my previous changes in make_outerjoininfo() were just
accidentally masking the problem, and should be reverted in favor of
forcing syntactic join order whenever an upper outer join's predicate
doesn't mention a lower outer join's LHS. This still allows the
chained-outer-joins style that is the normally optimizable case.
I also tightened things up some more in join_is_legal(). It seems to me
on review that what's really happening in the exception case where we
ignore a mismatched special join is that we're allowing the proposed join
to associate into the RHS of the outer join we're comparing it to. As
such, we should *always* insist that the proposed join be a left join,
which eliminates a bunch of rather dubious argumentation. The case where
we weren't enforcing that was the one that was already known buggy anyway
(it had a violatable Assert before the aforesaid commit) so it hardly
deserves a lot of deference.
Back-patch to all active branches, like the previous patch. The added
regression test case failed in all branches back to 9.1, and I think it's
only an unrelated change in costing calculations that kept 9.0 from
choosing a broken plan.
Diffstat (limited to 'src/backend/executor')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions