Re: Suspicious call of initial_cost_hashjoin()

On 3/2/18 05:01, Thomas Munro wrote: > On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 9:06 PM, Antonin Houska wrote: >> David Steele wrote: >>> Does this look right to you? >> >> Yes, this is what I meant. The patch applies cleanly and the code compiles >> well. >> >>> If so, can

Re: Suspicious call of initial_cost_hashjoin()

David Steele wrote: > On 12/22/17 6:13 AM, Thomas Munro wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 10:45 PM, Antonin Houska wrote: > >> try_partial_hashjoin_path() passes constant true to for the parallel_hash > >> argument of initial_cost_hashjoin(). Shouldn't it

Re: Re: Suspicious call of initial_cost_hashjoin()

Hi Antonin, On 12/22/17 6:13 AM, Thomas Munro wrote: > On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 10:45 PM, Antonin Houska wrote: >> try_partial_hashjoin_path() passes constant true to for the parallel_hash >> argument of initial_cost_hashjoin(). Shouldn't it instead pass the >> parallel_hash