On Mon, Aug 24, 2026 at 1:35 AM Richard Guo <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sat, Aug 22, 2026 at 2:15 AM Haibo Yan <[email protected]> wrote: > > One small testing point: the new hj_small/hj_large cases have no non-hash > > joinqual, so qp_qual_cost.per_tuple is zero and they don’t exercise the new > > v4 branch. > > > Also the test comment saying cpu_tuple_cost and qp_qual_cost are both > > charged > > on inner-side rows is no longer quite true for RIGHT_ANTI in v4. > > Right. Fixed. > > Attached is v5 of this patch. I plan to push it soon if there are no > objections. It can result in plan changes, so I don't plan to > back-patch it to stable branches. I once thought about pushing it to > v19, but at this late phase of the v19 cycle I'm inclined not to. > Maybe I would have done that if it were June. > > Any thoughts are welcome. > > - Richard
Thanks, v5 looks good to me. The RIGHT_ANTI qual-cost split now matches the executor behavior I was seeing, and the added Join Filter test addresses my previous testing concern. I also agree with not back-patching this, and at this point in the cycle I’d be inclined to leave v19 alone as well. LGTM.
