Horton

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

Andrei Lepikhov <a.lepikhov@postgrespro.ru>

View thread
From: Andrei Lepikhov <a.lepikhov@postgrespro.ru>
To: jian he <jian.universality@gmail.com>
Cc: Alena Rybakina <a.rybakina@postgrespro.ru>, Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>, "Finnerty, Jim" <jfinnert@amazon.com>, Marcos Pegoraro <marcos@f10.com.br>, teodor@sigaev.ru, Ranier Vilela <ranier.vf@gmail.com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>
Date: 2024-02-14T03:21:41Z
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,

On 13/2/2024 17:03, Andrei Lepikhov wrote:
> On 13/2/2024 07:00, jian he wrote:
>> The time is the last result of the 10 iterations.
> I'm not sure about the origins of such behavior, but it seems to be an 
> issue of parallel workers, not this specific optimization.
Having written that, I'd got a backburner. And to close that issue, I 
explored get_restriction_qual_cost(). A close look shows us that "x IN 
(..)" cheaper than its equivalent "x=N1 OR ...". Just numbers:

ANY: startup_cost = 0.0225; total_cost = 0.005
OR: startup_cost==0; total_cost = 0.0225

Expression total_cost is calculated per tuple. In your example, we have 
many tuples, so the low cost of expression per tuple dominates over the 
significant startup cost.

According to the above, SAOP adds 6250 to the cost of SeqScan; OR - 
13541. So, the total cost of the query with SAOP is less than with OR, 
and the optimizer doesn't choose heavy parallel workers. And it is the 
answer.

So, this example is more about the subtle balance between 
parallel/sequential execution, which can vary from one platform to another.

-- 
regards,
Andrei Lepikhov
Postgres Professional