Message-ID: <4B0FFDAE.4090201@sigaev.ru>
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2009 19:26:22 +0300
From: Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US;
	rv:1.8.1.23) Gecko/20090909 SeaMonkey/1.1.18
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
CC: Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: KNNGiST for knn-search (WIP)
References: <4B0AC9E1.5050509@sigaev.ru> <4B0EAE0D.606@sigaev.ru>
	<4B0FEF06.5050703@sigaev.ru> <27610.1259336294@sss.pgh.pa.us>
In-Reply-To: <27610.1259336294@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-R; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

>> Done, IndexScan and IndexPath have separate field to store order clauses.
> 
> Why?  Isn't that redundant with the pathkey structures?  We generate
> enough paths during a complex planning problem that I'm not in favor
> of adding unnecessary structures to them.
I found two ways to add support of knn-seaech to planner
- 0.4 version: add sorting clauses to restrictclauses in find_usable_indexes,
   and there is two issues:
   - find_usable_indexes could not be used to find indexes for index and bitmap
     scans at once, because sorting clauses will be used in bitmap scan. Full
     scan of index with knn-ordering on large index is much more expensive.
   - implied/refused predicate machinery is teached to ignore sorting clauses,
     but it's not so obvious: it should ignore operation returning non-boolean
     values
- 0.4.1 version: pull sort clauses separately and merge them with regular
   clauses at create_indexscan_plan function. That's solves problems above

Do you suggest to construct that clauses from pathkey representation? And append 
  constructed clauses to indexquals in create_indexscan_plan?
-- 
Teodor Sigaev                                   E-mail: teodor@sigaev.ru
                                                    WWW: http://www.sigaev.ru/