pg.ddx.io  pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com>
To: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>
Cc: Floris Van Nee <florisvannee@optiver.com>
Cc: David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>
Cc: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
Cc: Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
Cc: Jesper Pedersen <jesper.pedersen@redhat.com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
Cc: James Coleman <jtc331@gmail.com>
Cc: Rafia Sabih <rafia.pghackers@gmail.com>
Cc: Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>
Cc: bhushan.uparkar@gmail.com <bhushan.uparkar@gmail.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Cc: Alexander Korotkov <a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru>
Subject: Re: Index Skip Scan
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2020 18:39:41 +0200
Message-ID: <20200406163941.rh3okji2rhbnptyt@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFiTN-tp8S3BTwYXT33tnY=53fNCsS4ZZUjbEFtcJym1acoLeA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20200310123942.nse4uyd6yqtb7uyi@localhost>
	<CAApHDvo1NF0Qv9ZdnuDu03=1JwEq7GiVa-q3Qu=aMzmD9SV-vQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20200324163919.7nwqe72xzfatix4y@localhost>
	<CAFiTN-ujFt8g801vYnpoveCWsm0ExjYdjkewGasOQxiH0hmjzQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20200325085100.5fixaiteuoln4f45@localhost>
	<CAFiTN-sgsxS7cXi0sd9UWmbSwjPc6+78rGa4SFfAxGfs5zj7Aw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20200405161029.fpqqll7xbgfqy5na@localhost>
	<CAFiTN-sRnYp7MkctzYakyjWRPQQHFzEAwKV8vwf+sUgA+8JtQw@mail.gmail.com>
	<80ef5f0744f542b18e508fb589a6425a@opammb0562.comp.optiver.com>
	<CAFiTN-tp8S3BTwYXT33tnY=53fNCsS4ZZUjbEFtcJym1acoLeA@mail.gmail.com>

> On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 1:14 PM Floris Van Nee <florisvannee@optiver.com> wrote:
> >
> > There's a number of ways we can force a 'filter' rather than an
> > 'index condition'.

Hm, I wasn't aware about this one, thanks for bringing this up. Btw,
Floris, I would appreciate if in the future you can make it more visible
that changes you suggest contain some fixes. E.g. it wasn't clear for me
from your previous email that that's the case, and it doesn't make sense
to pull into different direction when we're trying to achieve the same
goal :)

> > In the patch I posted a week ago these cases are all handled
> > correctly, as it introduces this extra logic in the Executor.
>
> Okay, So I think we can merge those fixes in Dmitry's patch set.

I'll definitely take a look at suggested changes in filtering part.





view thread (248+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <20200406163941.rh3okji2rhbnptyt@localhost>
Permalink:  ../20200406163941.rh3okji2rhbnptyt@localhost/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/20200406163941.rh3okji2rhbnptyt@localhost

 · 

reply
Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
  Cc: 9erthalion6@gmail.com, dilipbalaut@gmail.com, florisvannee@optiver.com, dgrowleyml@gmail.com, horikyota.ntt@gmail.com, tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com, pg@bowt.ie, jesper.pedersen@redhat.com, alvherre@2ndquadrant.com, thomas.munro@gmail.com, jtc331@gmail.com, rafia.pghackers@gmail.com, jeff.janes@gmail.com, bhushan.uparkar@gmail.com, a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru
  Subject: Re: Index Skip Scan
  In-Reply-To: <20200406163941.rh3okji2rhbnptyt@localhost>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox