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 1/3/2024 22:33, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> I'm going to review and revise the patch.
Nice!
>
> One question I have yet.
>
> > /*
> > * Transformation only works with both side type is not
> > * { array | composite | domain | record }.
>
> Why do we limit transformation for these types? Also, it doesn't seem
> the current code restricts anything except composite/record.
Answer can be a bit long. Let's try to see comment a4424c5 at first.
We forbid record types although they can have typarray. It is because of
the RowExpr comparison specific. Although we have the record_eq()
routine, all base types in comparing records must be strictly the same.
Let me show:
explain analyze
SELECT * FROM
(SELECT ROW(relpages,relnatts) AS x FROM pg_class LIMIT 10) AS q1,
(SELECT ROW(relpages,relallvisible) AS x FROM pg_class LIMIT 10) AS q2
WHERE q1.x=q2.x;
ERROR: cannot compare dissimilar column types smallint and integer at
record column 2
As you can see, we have smallint and integer in the second position of
RowExpr and it causes the ERROR. It is the reason, why PostgreSQL
transforms ROW expressions to the series of ORs, Look:
explain (costs off)
SELECT oid,relname FROM pg_class
WHERE (oid,relname) IN ((1, 'a'), (2,'b'));
Bitmap Heap Scan on pg_class
Recheck Cond: ((relname = 'a'::name) OR (relname = 'b'::name))
Filter: (((oid = '1'::oid) AND (relname = 'a'::name)) OR ((oid =
'2'::oid) AND (relname = 'b'::name)))
-> BitmapOr
...
So, transforming composite types to the ScalarArrayOpExpr expression
doesn't make sense. Am I wrong?
The same with domain. If it have composite base type we reject the
transformation according to the logic above.
What about arrays? As I see, arrays don't have typarray and we can avoid
to spend more cycles after detection of TYPCATEGORY_ARRAY. I haven't
done it yet because have a second thought: what if to combine arrays
into the larger one? I'm unsure on that, so we can forbid it too.
--
regards,
Andrei Lepikhov
Postgres Professional