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
Hi, Richard! On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 8:28 AM Richard Guo <guofenglinux@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 21, 2024 at 3:34 PM Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com> wrote: > > I'm going to push this if no objections. > > Here is an Assert failure in match_orclause_to_indexcol. > > create table t (a int); > create index on t (a); > > # explain select * from t where a <= 0 or a <= 1; > server closed the connection unexpectedly > > The assertion is that the collected Const values cannot be NULL and > cannot be zero. The latter part about zero values doesn't make sense > to me. Why can't the values be zero? > > Assert(!value->constisnull && value->constvalue); Yes, this is a dumb assertion. Removed. ------ Regards, Alexander Korotkov Supabase