Horton

Re: POC, WIP: OR-clause support for indexes

Andrei Lepikhov <lepihov@gmail.com>

View thread
From: Andrei Lepikhov <lepihov@gmail.com>
To: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>
Cc: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org, Pavel Borisov <pashkin.elfe@gmail.com>, "a.rybakina" <a.rybakina@postgrespro.ru>
Date: 2025-03-24T10:10:00Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Make group_similar_or_args() reorder clause list as little as possible

  2. Allow usage of match_orclause_to_indexcol() for joins

  3. Skip not SOAP-supported indexes while transforming an OR clause into SAOP

  4. Remove the wrong assertion from match_orclause_to_indexcol()

  5. Teach bitmap path generation about transforming OR-clauses to SAOP's

  6. Transform OR-clauses to SAOP's during index matching

  7. Fix the value of or_to_any_transform_limit in postgresql.conf.sample

  8. Transform OR clauses to ANY expression

  9. MergeAttributes code deduplication

  10. SEARCH and CYCLE clauses

  11. Improve estimation of OR clauses using extended statistics.

  12. Teach btree to handle ScalarArrayOpExpr quals natively.

  13. Revise collation derivation method and expression-tree representation.

  14. Instead of trying to force WHERE clauses into CNF or DNF normal form,

Attachments

Hi,

Playing with the feature, I found a slightly irritating permutation - 
even if this code doesn't group any clauses, it may permute positions of 
the quals. See:

DROP TABLE IF EXISTS main_tbl;
CREATE TABLE main_tbl(id bigint, hundred int, thousand int);
CREATE INDEX mt_hundred_ix ON main_tbl(hundred);
CREATE INDEX mt_thousand_ix ON main_tbl(thousand);
VACUUM (ANALYZE) main_tbl;

SET enable_seqscan = off;
EXPLAIN (COSTS OFF)
SELECT m.id, m.hundred, m.thousand
FROM main_tbl m WHERE (m.hundred < 2 OR m.thousand < 3);

  Bitmap Heap Scan on public.main_tbl m
    Output: id, hundred, thousand
    Recheck Cond: ((m.thousand < 3) OR (m.hundred < 2))
    ->  BitmapOr
          ->  Bitmap Index Scan on mt_thousand_ix
                Index Cond: (m.thousand < 3)
          ->  Bitmap Index Scan on mt_hundred_ix
                Index Cond: (m.hundred < 2)

Conditions on the columns "thousand" and "hundred" changed their places 
according to the initial positions defined in the user's SQL.
It isn't okay. I see that users often use the trick of "OR order" to 
avoid unnecessary calculations - most frequently, Subplan evaluations. 
So, it makes sense to fix.
In the attachment, I have included a quick fix for this issue. Although 
many tests returned to their initial (pre-18) state, I added some tests 
specifically related to this issue to make it clearer.

-- 
regards, Andrei Lepikhov