YueZhang

> There are codes changed in MultiExecParallelHash, please add some parallel tests with runtime filter. got it.

> Looks interesting. And I have some questions to discuss. > > * Beside the seqscan, can the runtime filter apply to other types of scan? such as the index...

> ```sql > ```sql > gpadmin=# show gp_enable_runtime_filter_pushdown; > gp_enable_runtime_filter_pushdown > ----------------------------------- > on > (1 row) > ``` > > > > > > > > > > >...

> ``` > explain analyze > SELECT count(t1.c3) FROM t1, t3 WHERE t1.c1 = t3.c1 ; > QUERY PLAN > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---------------------------------------------- > Finalize Aggregate (cost=1700.07..1700.08 rows=1 width=8)...

> Hi, with gp_enable_runtime_filter_pushdown = on, execute SQL below will get a crash: > > ```sql > gpadmin=# show gp_enable_runtime_filter_pushdown; > gp_enable_runtime_filter_pushdown > ----------------------------------- > on > (1 row) >...

> Hi @zhangyue-hashdata I see that previous runtime filter implementation relies on some cost model at try_runtime_filter(). Do I understand it correctly, that this PR does not do any cost...

> There are codes changed in MultiExecParallelHash, please add some parallel tests with runtime filter. fix it in https://github.com/apache/cloudberry/pull/724/commits/7ab040ae178e9bb616bd75e0488aa6a2293d4183

> from tpcds 10s details table, there are some bad cases. **21,24,30,42,49,54,68-1,99** I retested these SQL statements that exhibited performance regression, and the latest test results show no noticeable performance...

> > from tpcds 10s details table, there are some bad cases. > > **21,24,30,42,49,54,68-1,99** > > I retested these SQL statements that exhibited performance regression, and the latest test...

> > I have retested the performance of tpcds 10s using the previously mentioned testing method. Please see the description part for the latest results > > cool, what about...