AsSplitQuery : Remove LEFT JOIN in child query when split the query and join self

[universorum]

When we split the query they include self

context.Users.Include(x => x.CreateBy)
        .Include(x => x.Orders)
        .Include(x => x.Scores)
        .AsNoTracking()
        .AsSplitQuery()
        .ToList();

It will join self in all generated query

SELECT "u"."Id", "u"."CreateById", "u0"."Id", "u0"."CreateById"
FROM "Users" AS "u"
         LEFT JOIN "Users" AS "u0" ON "u"."CreateById" = "u0"."Id"
ORDER BY "u"."Id", "u0"."Id";

SELECT "o"."Id", "o"."BuyerId", "o"."Value", "u"."Id", "u0"."Id"
FROM "Users" AS "u"
         LEFT JOIN "Users" AS "u0" ON "u"."CreateById" = "u0"."Id"
         INNER JOIN "Orders" AS "o" ON "u"."Id" = "o"."BuyerId"
ORDER BY "u"."Id", "u0"."Id";

SELECT "s"."Id", "s"."StudentId", "s"."Value", "u"."Id", "u0"."Id"
FROM "Users" AS "u"
         LEFT JOIN "Users" AS "u0" ON "u"."CreateById" = "u0"."Id"
         INNER JOIN "Score" AS "s" ON "u"."Id" = "s"."StudentId"
ORDER BY "u"."Id", "u0"."Id";

Look like it only use for sorting.
But why we need order it in all query?
Is it possible to remove that?
I think a query like this would work well:

SELECT "o"."Id", "o"."BuyerId", "o"."Value", "u"."Id"
FROM "Users" AS "u"
         INNER JOIN "Orders" AS "o" ON "u"."Id" = "o"."BuyerId"
ORDER BY "u"."Id";

SELECT "s"."Id", "s"."StudentId", "s"."Value", "u"."Id"
FROM "Users" AS "u"
         INNER JOIN "Score" AS "s" ON "u"."Id" = "s"."StudentId"
ORDER BY "u"."Id";

Repo

using System;
using Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore;
using Microsoft.Extensions.Logging;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Diagnostics;
using System.Linq;


using (var context = new MyContext())
{
    if (context.Database.EnsureCreated())
    {
        var user = new User();
        context.Users.Add(user);
        context.Users.Add(new User { CreateBy = user });
        context.SaveChanges();
    }
}


using (var context = new MyContext())
{
    var result = context.Users.Include(x => x.CreateBy)
        .Include(x => x.Orders)
        .Include(x => x.Scores)
        .AsNoTracking()
        .AsSplitQuery()
        .ToList();
}

public class MyContext : DbContext
{
    public DbSet<User>  Users  { get; set; }
    public DbSet<Order> Orders { get; set; }
    public DbSet<Score> Score  { get; set; }

    protected override void OnConfiguring(DbContextOptionsBuilder optionsBuilder) =>
        optionsBuilder.UseSqlite("Data Source=application.db;").LogTo(Console.WriteLine, LogLevel.Information);
}

public class User
{
    public int  Id         { get; set; }
    public int? CreateById { get; set; }

    public virtual User?               CreateBy { get; set; }
    public virtual ICollection<User>?  Created  { get; set; }
    public virtual ICollection<Order>? Orders   { get; set; }
    public virtual ICollection<Score>? Scores   { get; set; }
}

public class Order
{
    public int Id      { get; set; }
    public int BuyerId { get; set; }
    public int Value   { get; set; }

    public virtual required User Buyer { get; set; }
}

public class Score
{
    public int Id        { get; set; }
    public int StudentId { get; set; }
    public int Value     { get; set; }

    public virtual required User Student { get; set; }
}

Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore 7.0.10
Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.Sqlite 7.0.10

Possibly related: #29182

[ajcvickers]

Look like it only use for sorting. But why we need order it in all query?

Sorting is needed so that EF Core can correctly fixup the related entities after they have been returned.

[ajcvickers]

See also #29171.

[stevendarby]

Look like it only use for sorting. But why we need order it in all query?

Sorting is needed so that EF Core can correctly fixup the related entities after they have been returned.

Not for reference navigations. I believe this is a duplicate of #29182. Please upvote if you agree @universorum

[roji]

Duplicate of #29182

[stevendarby]

Sorry to be a pain @universorum, and possibly a bit cheeky of me, but I meant if you could up-vote the other open issue rather than my comment, as this would slightly increase its chances of getting fixed. (I've identified 3 other duplicates, it's a shame they can't be converted to up-votes!)