| Message ID | 20200731113820.5765-42-ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Performance work | expand |
> On Jul 31, 2020, at 12:38 PM, Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com> wrote: > > The condition on r.job is more naturally thought of as a join > condition than a where condition. (This is an inner join, so the > semantics are identical.) > > Also, for clarity, swap the flight and job conditions round, so that > the ON clause is a series of r.thing = otherthing. > > No functional change. > > Signed-off-by: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com> Reviewed-by: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@citrix.com>
diff --git a/Osstest/Executive.pm b/Osstest/Executive.pm index 8e4c5b9a..a69c624f 100644 --- a/Osstest/Executive.pm +++ b/Osstest/Executive.pm @@ -1153,10 +1153,10 @@ sub duration_estimator ($$;$$) { FROM flights f JOIN jobs j USING (flight) JOIN runvars r - ON f.flight=r.flight + ON r.flight=f.flight + AND r.job=j.job= AND r.name=? - WHERE j.job=r.job - AND f.blessing=? + WHERE f.blessing=? AND f.branch=? AND j.job=? AND r.val=?
The condition on r.job is more naturally thought of as a join condition than a where condition. (This is an inner join, so the semantics are identical.) Also, for clarity, swap the flight and job conditions round, so that the ON clause is a series of r.thing = otherthing. No functional change. Signed-off-by: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com> CC: George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@citrix.com> --- v2: New patch. --- Osstest/Executive.pm | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)