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

Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>

From: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>
To: Alena Rybakina <a.rybakina@postgrespro.ru>
Cc: Pavel Borisov <pashkin.elfe@gmail.com>, Andrei Lepikhov <lepihov@gmail.com>, Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Date: 2025-03-27T23:18:19Z
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!

On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 2:46 PM Alena Rybakina
<a.rybakina@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
> I agree with Andrey's changes and think we should fix this, because otherwise it might be inconvenient.
> For example, without this changes we will have to have different test output files for the same query for different versions of Postres in extensions if the whole change is only related to the order of column output for a transformation that was not applied.

I agree with problem spotted by Andrei: it should be preferred to
preserve original order of clauses as much as possible.  The approach
implemented in Andrei's patch seems fragile for me.  Original order is
preserved if we didn't find any group.  But once we find a single
group original order might be destroyed completely.

The attached patch changes the reordering algorithm of
group_similar_or_args() in the following way.  We reorder each group
of similar clauses so that the first item of the group stays in place,
but all the other items are moved after it.  So, if there are no
similar clauses, the order of clauses stays the same.  When there are
some groups, only required reordering happens while the rest of the
clauses remain in their places.

------
Regards,
Alexander Korotkov
Supabase