Re: POC, WIP: OR-clause support for indexes
Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>
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 Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 8:20 AM Andrei Lepikhov <lepihov@gmail.com> wrote: > On 18/11/2024 06:19, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 15, 2024 at 3:27 PM Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com> wrote: > > Here is the next revision of this patch. No material changes, > > adjustments for comments and commit message. > I have passed through the code and found no issues. Maybe only phrase: > "eval_const_expressions() will be simplified if there is more than one." > which is used in both patches: here, the 'will' may be removed, as for me. Exactly same wording is used in match_index_to_operand(). So, I think we can save this. > Also, I re-read the thread, and as AFAICS, no other issues remain. So, I > think it would be OK to move the status of this feature to 'ready for > committer'. Yes, I also re-read the thread. One thing caught my eye is that Robert didn't answer my point that as we generally don't care about lazy parameters evaluation while pushing quals as index conds then we don't have to do this in this patch. I think there were quite amount of time to express disagreement if any. If even this question will arise, that's well isolated issue which could be nailed down later. I'm going to push this if no objections. Links. 1. https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAPpHfdt8kowRDUkmOnO7_WJJQ1uk%2BO379JiZCk_9_Pt5AQ4%2B0w%40mail.gmail.com ------ Regards, Alexander Korotkov Supabase