On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 10:39 AM Richard Guo <guofengli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 10:09 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > >> However, given that what we need is to exclude parameterization >> that depends on the currently-formed OJ, it seems to me we can do >> it more simply and without any new JoinPathExtraData field, >> as attached. What do you think? > > > I think it makes sense. At first I wondered if we should also exclude > parameterization that depends on OJs that have already been formed as > part of this joinrel. But it seems not possible that the input paths > have parameterization dependency on these OJs. So it should be > sufficient to only consider the currently-formed OJ. > BTW, it seems that extra->sjinfo would always have a valid value here. So maybe we do not need to check if it is not NULL explicitly? Thanks Richard
