Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 15:20:31 -0500
From: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
To: Soumyadeep Chakraborty <soumyadeep2007@gmail.com>
Cc: Konstantin Knizhnik <k.knizhnik@postgrespro.ru>,
	David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>,
	pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: avoid bitmapOR-ing indexes with scan condition inconsistent with
 partition constraint
Message-ID: <20201013202031.GP9241@telsasoft.com>
References: <20200704004503.GA23805@telsasoft.com>
 <20200715001749.GU23581@telsasoft.com>
 <20200803181223.GC28072@telsasoft.com>
 <CAE-ML+-4EdeqH2cAYkYM9rBQasaZaGfxYbCNBe+adZvPH-wihg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAE-ML+-4EdeqH2cAYkYM9rBQasaZaGfxYbCNBe+adZvPH-wihg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 04:52:02PM -0700, Soumyadeep Chakraborty wrote:
> Hi Justin,
> 
> Attached is a minimal patch that is rebased and removes the
> dependency on Konstantin's earlier patch[1], making it enough to remove
> the extraneous index scans as Justin brought up. Is this the direction we
> want to head in?

Yes, thanks for doing that.  I hadn't dug into it yet to figure out what to put
where to separate the patches.  It seems like my patch handles a different goal
than Konstantin's, but they both depend on having the constraints populated.

-- 
Justin