Horton

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

Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>

View thread
From: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>
To: Alena Rybakina <a.rybakina@postgrespro.ru>
Cc: Nikolay Shaplov <dhyan@nataraj.su>, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org, Andrei Lepikhov <a.lepikhov@postgrespro.ru>, jian he <jian.universality@gmail.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>, Marcos Pegoraro <marcos@f10.com.br>, teodor@sigaev.ru, Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>, Ranier Vilela <ranier.vf@gmail.com>
Date: 2024-08-21T00:17:40Z
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 Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 10:13 PM Alena Rybakina
<a.rybakina@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
> On 07.08.2024 04:11, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 5, 2024 at 11:24 PM Alena Rybakina
> > <a.rybakina@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
> >> Ok, thank you for your work)
> >>
> >> I think we can leave only the two added libraries in the first patch,
> >> others are superfluous.
> > Thank you.
> > I also have fixed some grammar issues.
>
> While reviewing the patch, I can't understand one part of the code where
> we check the comparability of restrictinfos.
>
> /* RestrictInfo parameters dmust match parent */
>          if (subRinfo->is_pushed_down != rinfo->is_pushed_down ||
>              subRinfo->is_clone != rinfo->is_clone ||
>              subRinfo->security_level != rinfo->security_level ||
>              !bms_equal(subRinfo->required_relids,
> rinfo->required_relids) ||
>              !bms_equal(subRinfo->incompatible_relids,
> rinfo->incompatible_relids) ||
>              !bms_equal(subRinfo->outer_relids, rinfo->outer_relids))
>              return NULL;
>
> I didn't find a place in the optimizer where required_relids,
> incompatible_relids and outer_relids become different. Each
> make_restrictinfo function takes arguments from
> parent data.
>
> I disabled this check and the regression tests passed. This code is
> needed for security verification， may I clarify?

Thank you for pointing this.  I've rechecked the life cycle of those
parameters.  make_restrictinfo() makes them initially equal (except
required_relids which might be narrower for sub-clauses).  The later
changes like adjust_appendrel_attrs_mutator() applies equally for the
both parent and children.

So, I've turned this into assert check.

> In the last patch I corrected the libraries - one of them was not in
> alphabetical order.

Thank you!

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().

------
Regards,
Alexander Korotkov
Supabase