public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Peter Geoghegan <[email protected]>
To: a.rybakina <[email protected]>
Cc: Finnerty, Jim <[email protected]>
Cc: Marcos Pegoraro <[email protected]>
Cc: Andrey Lepikhov <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: Ranier Vilela <[email protected]>
Cc: Tomas Vondra <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: POC, WIP: OR-clause support for indexes
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2023 15:11:24 -0700
Message-ID: <CAH2-Wzkp1RYWC4Lsh==ALNeOR=gQEtCMVbcFRLa-faMQe6YRPA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
<CAB-JLwb7NQHUdrc9_coV+kKGYF7hBb+XktY6TkYj4aejCqF9DQ@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAH2-WzmD5u5kCZG0qMtVySz8VB1_drOiX=j0buDufK-EJc3YkQ@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAH2-WzkzzDK7FPEv7M5GL_jo0E81DDG41t7wHU9SOAwnqwX=eQ@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAH2-Wzm-W7KYtMQ_3F1zU3Fg0zhRd-kASuOzNewXEWjR5kZrtg@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAH2-WznHNTXQ=bX4Kc9hHebyXvR0a0CxH9OnirkP0ahgQAX7Aw@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAH2-WzkNaPbBJ_yWDXzk5ESJZH62vi=+brHHQ2SrDrPXka1xYA@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAH2-WzmG-+vvN6YEh4J_j3-Q1Yn=HRrjDrz2HDhttPcLVqN0rw@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAH2-WzkmLg0JPXkZ75b+ha_wJGoJk3QyZ6aUjA0Ba11rdPwdgw@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 3:08 AM a.rybakina <[email protected]> wrote:
> This is an interesting feature. I didn't notice this function before, I studied many times consider_new_or_cause, which were called there. As far as I know, there is a selectivity calculation going on there, but as far as I remember, I called it earlier after my conversion, and unfortunately it didn't solve my problem with calculating selectivity. I'll reconsider it again, maybe I can find something I missed.
Back in 2003, commit 9888192f removed (or at least simplified) what
were then called "CNF/DNF CONVERSION ROUTINES". Prior to that point
the optimizer README had something about leaving clause lists
un-normalized leading to selectivity estimation problems. Bear in mind
that this is a couple of years before ScalarArrayOpExpr was first
invented. Apparently even back then "The OR-of-ANDs format is useful
for indexscan implementation". It's possible that that old work will
offer some hints on what to do now.
In a way it's not surprising that work in this area would have some
impact on selectivies. The surprising part is the extent of the
problem, I suppose.
I see that a lot of the things in this area are just used by BitmapOr
clauses, such as build_paths_for_OR() -- but you're not necessarily
able to use any of that stuff. Also, choose_bitmap_and() has some
stuff about how it compensates to avoid "too-small selectivity that
makes a redundant AND step look like it reduces the total cost". It
also mentions some problems with match_join_clauses_to_index() +
extract_restriction_or_clauses(). Again, this might be a good place to
look for more clues.
--
Peter Geoghegan
view thread (33+ messages) latest in thread
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: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: POC, WIP: OR-clause support for indexes
In-Reply-To: <CAH2-Wzkp1RYWC4Lsh==ALNeOR=gQEtCMVbcFRLa-faMQe6YRPA@mail.gmail.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox