Re: POC, WIP: OR-clause support for indexes
Andrei Lepikhov <a.lepikhov@postgrespro.ru>
Commits
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Make group_similar_or_args() reorder clause list as little as possible
- 775a06d44c04 18.0 landed
-
Allow usage of match_orclause_to_indexcol() for joins
- 627d63419e22 18.0 landed
-
Skip not SOAP-supported indexes while transforming an OR clause into SAOP
- 5bba0546eecb 18.0 landed
-
Remove the wrong assertion from match_orclause_to_indexcol()
- d4d11940df94 18.0 landed
-
Teach bitmap path generation about transforming OR-clauses to SAOP's
- ae4569161a27 18.0 landed
-
Transform OR-clauses to SAOP's during index matching
- d4378c0005e6 18.0 landed
-
Fix the value of or_to_any_transform_limit in postgresql.conf.sample
- 2af75e117478 17.0 landed
-
Transform OR clauses to ANY expression
- 72bd38cc99a1 17.0 landed
-
MergeAttributes code deduplication
- 64444ce071f6 17.0 cited
-
SEARCH and CYCLE clauses
- 3696a600e229 14.0 cited
-
Improve estimation of OR clauses using extended statistics.
- 25a9e54d2db3 14.0 cited
-
Teach btree to handle ScalarArrayOpExpr quals natively.
- 9e8da0f75731 9.2.0 cited
-
Revise collation derivation method and expression-tree representation.
- b310b6e31ce5 9.1.0 cited
-
Instead of trying to force WHERE clauses into CNF or DNF normal form,
- 9888192fb773 8.0.0 cited
On 21/8/2024 02:17, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > Also, I convert the check you've introduced in the previous message to > op_in_opfamily(), and introduced collation check similar to > match_opclause_to_indexcol(). Hi, I passed through the patches with fresh sight. Conceptually, this approach looks much better than the previous series. Just for the record: previously, we attempted to resolve two issues in one - improve the execution plan and save cycles during the optimisation. As I see it, it is almost impossible in this feature. So, I should come to terms with carrying long OR lists through the planning and the additional overhead this feature generates. I also see that the optimiser has obtained additional planning strategies with these patches and hasn't lost any. Couple of findings: First: /* Only operator clauses scan match */ Should it be: /* Only operator clauses can match */ ? The second one: When creating IndexClause, we assign the original and derived clauses to the new, containing transformed array. But logically, we should set the clause with a list of ORs as the original. Why did you do so? -- regards, Andrei Lepikhov Postgres Professional