Commit 8076c8c7 authored by Tom Lane's avatar Tom Lane

Come to think of it, we should check that commutator pairs have the same

merges/hashes property settings.
parent b259924e
......@@ -382,6 +382,16 @@ WHERE (p1.oprcanmerge OR p1.oprcanhash) AND NOT
-----+---------
(0 rows)
-- What's more, the commutator had better be mergejoinable/hashjoinable too.
SELECT p1.oid, p1.oprname, p2.oid, p2.oprname
FROM pg_operator AS p1, pg_operator AS p2
WHERE p1.oprcom = p2.oid AND
(p1.oprcanmerge != p2.oprcanmerge OR
p1.oprcanhash != p2.oprcanhash);
oid | oprname | oid | oprname
-----+---------+-----+---------
(0 rows)
-- Mergejoinable operators should appear as equality members of btree index
-- opfamilies.
SELECT p1.oid, p1.oprname
......
......@@ -315,6 +315,14 @@ SELECT p1.oid, p1.oprname FROM pg_operator AS p1
WHERE (p1.oprcanmerge OR p1.oprcanhash) AND NOT
(p1.oprkind = 'b' AND p1.oprresult = 'bool'::regtype AND p1.oprcom != 0);
-- What's more, the commutator had better be mergejoinable/hashjoinable too.
SELECT p1.oid, p1.oprname, p2.oid, p2.oprname
FROM pg_operator AS p1, pg_operator AS p2
WHERE p1.oprcom = p2.oid AND
(p1.oprcanmerge != p2.oprcanmerge OR
p1.oprcanhash != p2.oprcanhash);
-- Mergejoinable operators should appear as equality members of btree index
-- opfamilies.
......
Markdown is supported
0% or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment