public inbox for [email protected]  
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alexander Korotkov <[email protected]>
To: Alena Rybakina <[email protected]>
Cc: Nikolay Shaplov <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: Andrei Lepikhov <[email protected]>
Cc: jian he <[email protected]>
Cc: Robert Haas <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: Peter Geoghegan <[email protected]>
Cc: Marcos Pegoraro <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: Tomas Vondra <[email protected]>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <[email protected]>
Cc: Ranier Vilela <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: POC, WIP: OR-clause support for indexes
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2024 22:48:53 +0300
Message-ID: <CAPpHfdv9GrXfCOdPsMszBrORig+nW2+JBuMD-np_keVuKJ7bdQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPpHfdu5iQOjF93vGbjidsQkhHvY2NSm29duENYH_cbhC6x+Mg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<CAPpHfdu1AZK91T8Yy4VYNYO+TEX9dSFWK59sRB6K9eM=zEjHOA@mail.gmail.com>
	<8969055.VV5PYv0bhD@thinkpad-pgpro>
	<[email protected]>
	<CAPpHfdsrtAB=0B-qYuQMPgyyy=-CycFJfzTWO_30nx27vXc3dA@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
	<CAPpHfdvUEjkuFNUbg7GuLkXotwvpDgBYz4S8YcE=LRf9aBQh-Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
	<CAPpHfdu5iQOjF93vGbjidsQkhHvY2NSm29duENYH_cbhC6x+Mg@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Jul 29, 2024 at 5:36 AM Alexander Korotkov <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 28, 2024 at 12:59 PM Alena Rybakina
> > Because of these reasons, I tried to save this and that transformation
> > together for each column and try to analyze for each expr separately
> > which method would be optimal.
>
> Yes, with v27 of the patch, optimization wouldn't work in these cases.
> However, you are using quite small table.  If you will use larger
> table or disable sequential scans, there would be bitmap plans to
> handle these queries.  So, v27 doesn't make the situation worse. It
> just doesn't optimize all that it could potentially optimize and
> that's OK.
>
> I've written a separate 0002 patch to address this.  Now, before
> generation of paths for bitmap OR, similar OR entries are grouped
> together.  When considering a group of similar entries, they are
> considered both together and one-by-one.  Ideally we could consider
> more sophisticated grouping, but that seems fine for now.  You can
> check how this patch handles the cases of above.
>
> Also, 0002 address issue of duplicated bitmap scan conditions in
> different forms. During generate_bitmap_or_paths() we need to exclude
> considered condition for other clauses.  It couldn't be as normal
> filtered out in the latter stage, because could reach the index in
> another form.
>
> > I agree with you that there is an overhead and your patch fixes this
> > problem, but optimizer needs to have a good ordering of expressions for
> > application.
> >
> > I think we can try to move the transformation to another place where
> > there is already a loop pass, and also save two options "OR" expr and
> > "ANY" expr in one place (through BoolExpr) (like find_duplicate_ors
> > function) and teach the optimizer to determine which option is better,
> > for example, like now in match_orclause_to_indexcol() function.
> >
> > What do you thing about it?
>
> find_duplicate_ors() and similar places were already tried before.
> Please, check upthread.  This approach receives severe critics. AFAIU,
> the problem is that find_duplicate_ors() during preprocessing, a
> cost-blind stage.
>
> This is why I'd like to continue developing ideas of v27, because it
> fits the existing framework.

The revised patchset is attached.  There is no material changes in the
logic, I found no issues here yet.  But it comes with refactoring,
cleanup, more comments and better commit messages.  I think now this
patchset is understandable and ready for review.

------
Regards,
Alexander Korotkov
Supabase


Attachments:

  [application/octet-stream] v30-0002-Teach-bitmap-path-generation-about-transforming-.patch (22.8K, ../CAPpHfdv9GrXfCOdPsMszBrORig+nW2+JBuMD-np_keVuKJ7bdQ@mail.gmail.com/2-v30-0002-Teach-bitmap-path-generation-about-transforming-.patch)
  download | inline diff:
From ce9532cdd81f236e3da65bb2a22e33dd1af6413e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Alexander Korotkov <[email protected]>
Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2024 16:36:34 +0300
Subject: [PATCH v30 2/2] Teach bitmap path generation about transforming
 OR-clauses to SAOP's

When optimizer generates bitmap paths, it considers breaking OR-clause
arguments one-by-one.  But now, a group of similar OR-clauses can be
transformed into SAOP during index matching.  So, bitmap paths should
keep up.

This commit teaches bitmap paths generation machinery to group similar
OR-clauses into dedicated RestrictInfos.  Those RestrictInfos are considered
both to match index as a whole (as SAOP), or to match as a set of individual
OR-clause argument one-by-one (the old way).

Therefore bitmap path generation will takes advantage of OR-clauses to SAOP's
transformation.  The old way of handling them is also considered.  So, there
shouldn't be planning regression.

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/567ED6CA.2040504%40sigaev.ru
Reviewed-by: Alexander Korotkov <[email protected]>
---
 src/backend/optimizer/path/indxpath.c      | 355 ++++++++++++++++++++-
 src/test/regress/expected/create_index.out |  28 +-
 src/test/regress/expected/join.out         |  56 ++--
 src/tools/pgindent/typedefs.list           |   1 +
 4 files changed, 394 insertions(+), 46 deletions(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/optimizer/path/indxpath.c b/src/backend/optimizer/path/indxpath.c
index 0ca51bbbb19..970cae1bc55 100644
--- a/src/backend/optimizer/path/indxpath.c
+++ b/src/backend/optimizer/path/indxpath.c
@@ -1177,6 +1177,325 @@ build_paths_for_OR(PlannerInfo *root, RelOptInfo *rel,
 	return result;
 }
 
+/*
+ * Data structure representing information about OR-clause argument and its
+ * matching index key.  Used for grouping of similar OR-clause arguments in
+ * group_similar_or_args().
+ */
+typedef struct
+{
+	int			indexnum;		/* index of the matching index */
+	int			colnum;			/* index of the matching column */
+	Oid			opno;			/* OID of the OpClause operator */
+	Oid			inputcollid;	/* OID of the OpClause input collation */
+	int			argindex;		/* index of the clause in the list of
+								 * arguments */
+} OrArgIndexMatch;
+
+/*
+ * Comparison function for OrArgIndexMatch which provides sort order placing
+ * similar OR-clause arguments together.
+ */
+static int
+or_arg_index_match_cmp(const void *a, const void *b)
+{
+	const OrArgIndexMatch *match_a = (const OrArgIndexMatch *) a;
+	const OrArgIndexMatch *match_b = (const OrArgIndexMatch *) b;
+
+	if (match_a->indexnum < match_b->indexnum)
+		return -1;
+	else if (match_a->indexnum > match_b->indexnum)
+		return 1;
+
+	if (match_a->colnum < match_b->colnum)
+		return -1;
+	else if (match_a->colnum > match_b->colnum)
+		return 1;
+
+	if (match_a->opno < match_b->opno)
+		return -1;
+	else if (match_a->opno > match_b->opno)
+		return 1;
+
+	if (match_a->inputcollid < match_b->inputcollid)
+		return -1;
+	else if (match_a->inputcollid > match_b->inputcollid)
+		return 1;
+
+	if (match_a->argindex < match_b->argindex)
+		return -1;
+	else if (match_a->argindex > match_b->argindex)
+		return 1;
+
+	return 0;
+}
+
+/*
+ * group_similar_or_args
+ *		Group similar OR arguments intro dedicated RestrictInfos.  Process
+ *		arguments of 'rinfo' clause, returns the processed list of arguments.
+ *
+ * Similar arguments clauses of form "indexkey op constant" having same
+ * indexkey, operator, and collation.  Constantant may compise either Const
+ * or Param.
+ */
+static List *
+group_similar_or_args(PlannerInfo *root, RelOptInfo *rel, RestrictInfo *rinfo)
+{
+	int			n;
+	int			i;
+	int			group_start;
+	OrArgIndexMatch *matches;
+	ListCell   *lc;
+	ListCell   *lc2;
+	List	   *orargs;
+	List	   *result = NIL;
+
+	Assert(IsA(rinfo->orclause, BoolExpr));
+	orargs = ((BoolExpr *) rinfo->orclause)->args;
+	n = list_length(orargs);
+
+	/*
+	 * Allocate and fill OrArgIndexMatch struct for for each clause in the
+	 * argument list.
+	 */
+	i = -1;
+	matches = (OrArgIndexMatch *) palloc(sizeof(OrArgIndexMatch) * n);
+	foreach(lc, orargs)
+	{
+		Node	   *arg = lfirst(lc);
+		RestrictInfo *argrinfo;
+		OpExpr	   *clause;
+		Oid			opno;
+		Node	   *leftop,
+				   *rightop;
+		Node	   *nonConstExpr;
+		int			indexnum;
+		int			colnum;
+
+		i++;
+		matches[i].argindex = i;
+		matches[i].indexnum = -1;
+		matches[i].colnum = -1;
+		matches[i].opno = InvalidOid;
+		matches[i].inputcollid = InvalidOid;
+
+		if (!IsA(arg, RestrictInfo))
+			continue;
+
+		argrinfo = castNode(RestrictInfo, arg);
+
+		/* Only operator clauses scan match  */
+		if (!IsA(argrinfo->clause, OpExpr))
+			continue;
+
+		clause = (OpExpr *) argrinfo->clause;
+		opno = clause->opno;
+
+		/* Only binary operators can match  */
+		if (list_length(clause->args) != 2)
+			return NULL;
+
+		/*
+		 * Ignore any RelabelType node above the operands.  This is needed to
+		 * be able to apply indexscanning in binary-compatible-operator cases.
+		 * Note: we can assume there is at most one RelabelType node;
+		 * eval_const_expressions() will have simplified if more than one.
+		 */
+		leftop = get_leftop(clause);
+		if (IsA(leftop, RelabelType))
+			leftop = (Node *) ((RelabelType *) leftop)->arg;
+
+		rightop = get_rightop(clause);
+		if (IsA(rightop, RelabelType))
+			rightop = (Node *) ((RelabelType *) rightop)->arg;
+
+		/*
+		 * Check for clauses of the form: (indexkey operator constant) or
+		 * (constant operator indexkey).  But we don't know a particular index
+		 * yet.  First check for a constant, which must be Const or Param.
+		 * That's cheaper than search for a index key among all indexes.
+		 */
+		if (IsA(leftop, Const) || IsA(leftop, Param))
+		{
+			opno = get_commutator(opno);
+
+			if (!OidIsValid(opno))
+			{
+				/* commutator doesn't exist, we can't reverse the order */
+				continue;
+			}
+			nonConstExpr = rightop;
+		}
+		else if (IsA(rightop, Const) || IsA(rightop, Param))
+		{
+			nonConstExpr = leftop;
+		}
+		else
+		{
+			continue;
+		}
+
+		/*
+		 * Match non-constant part to the index key.  It's possible that a
+		 * single non-constant part matches multiple index keys.  It's OK, we
+		 * just stop with first matching index key.  Given that this choice is
+		 * determined the same for every clause, we will group similar clauses
+		 * together anyway.
+		 */
+		indexnum = 0;
+		foreach(lc2, rel->indexlist)
+		{
+			IndexOptInfo *index = (IndexOptInfo *) lfirst(lc2);
+
+			/* Ignore index if it doesn't support bitmap scans */
+			if (!index->amhasgetbitmap)
+				continue;
+
+			for (colnum = 0; colnum < index->nkeycolumns; colnum++)
+			{
+				if (match_index_to_operand(nonConstExpr, colnum, index))
+				{
+					matches[i].indexnum = indexnum;
+					matches[i].colnum = colnum;
+					matches[i].opno = opno;
+					matches[i].inputcollid = clause->inputcollid;
+				}
+			}
+			indexnum++;
+		}
+	}
+
+	/* Sort clauses to make similar clauses go together */
+	pg_qsort(matches, n, sizeof(OrArgIndexMatch), or_arg_index_match_cmp);
+
+	/* Group similar clauses into */
+	group_start = 0;
+	for (i = 1; i <= n; i++)
+	{
+		/* Check if it's a group boundary */
+		if (group_start >= 0 &&
+			(i == n ||
+			 matches[i].indexnum != matches[group_start].indexnum ||
+			 matches[i].colnum != matches[group_start].colnum ||
+			 matches[i].opno != matches[group_start].opno ||
+			 matches[i].inputcollid != matches[group_start].inputcollid ||
+			 matches[i].indexnum == -1))
+		{
+			/*
+			 * One clause in group: add it "as is" to the upper-level OR.
+			 */
+			if (i - group_start == 1)
+			{
+				result = lappend(result,
+								 list_nth(orargs,
+										  matches[group_start].argindex));
+			}
+			else
+			{
+				/*
+				 * Two or more clauses in a group: create a nested OR.
+				 */
+				List	   *args = NIL;
+				RestrictInfo *subrinfo = makeNode(RestrictInfo);
+				int			j;
+
+				Assert(i - group_start >= 2);
+
+				/* Construct the list of nested OR arguments */
+				for (j = group_start; j < i; j++)
+					args = lappend(args, list_nth(orargs, matches[j].argindex));
+
+				/* Construct the nested OR and wrap it with RestrictInfo */
+				*subrinfo = *rinfo;
+				subrinfo->clause = make_orclause(args);
+				subrinfo->orclause = subrinfo->clause;
+				result = lappend(result, subrinfo);
+			}
+
+			group_start = i;
+		}
+	}
+	pfree(matches);
+	return result;
+}
+
+/*
+ * make_bitmap_paths_for_or_group
+ *		Generate bitmap paths for a group of similar OR-clause arguments
+ *		produced by group_similar_or_args().
+ *
+ * This function considers two cases: (1) matching a group of clauses to
+ * the index as a whole, and (2) matching the individual clauses one-by-one.
+ * (1) typically comprises an optimal solution.  If not, (2) typically
+ * comprises fair alternative.
+ *
+ * Ideally, we could consider all arbitraty splits of arguments into
+ * sub-groups, but that could lead to unacceptable computational complexity.
+ * This is why we only consider two cases of above.
+ */
+static List *
+make_bitmap_paths_for_or_group(PlannerInfo *root, RelOptInfo *rel,
+							   RestrictInfo *ri, List *other_clauses)
+{
+	List	   *jointlist = NIL;
+	List	   *splitlist = NIL;
+	ListCell   *lc;
+	List	   *orargs;
+	List	   *args = ((BoolExpr *) ri->clause)->args;
+	Cost		jointcost = 0.0,
+				splitcost = 0.0;
+	Path	   *bitmapqual;
+	List	   *indlist;
+
+	/*
+	 * First, try to match the whole group to the one index.
+	 */
+	orargs = list_make1(ri);
+	indlist = build_paths_for_OR(root, rel,
+								 orargs,
+								 other_clauses);
+	if (indlist != NIL)
+	{
+		bitmapqual = choose_bitmap_and(root, rel, indlist);
+		jointcost = bitmapqual->total_cost;
+		jointlist = list_make1(bitmapqual);
+	}
+
+	/*
+	 * Also try to match all containing clauses one-by-one.
+	 */
+	foreach(lc, args)
+	{
+		orargs = list_make1(lfirst(lc));
+
+		indlist = build_paths_for_OR(root, rel,
+									 orargs,
+									 other_clauses);
+
+		if (indlist == NIL)
+		{
+			splitlist = NIL;
+			break;
+		}
+
+		bitmapqual = choose_bitmap_and(root, rel, indlist);
+		splitcost += bitmapqual->total_cost;
+		splitlist = lappend(splitlist, bitmapqual);
+	}
+
+	/*
+	 * Pick the best option.
+	 */
+	if (splitlist == NIL)
+		return jointlist;
+	else if (jointlist == NIL)
+		return splitlist;
+	else
+		return (jointcost < splitcost) ? jointlist : splitlist;
+}
+
+
 /*
  * generate_bitmap_or_paths
  *		Look through the list of clauses to find OR clauses, and generate
@@ -1207,6 +1526,7 @@ generate_bitmap_or_paths(PlannerInfo *root, RelOptInfo *rel,
 		List	   *pathlist;
 		Path	   *bitmapqual;
 		ListCell   *j;
+		List	   *groupedArgs;
 
 		/* Ignore RestrictInfos that aren't ORs */
 		if (!restriction_is_or_clause(rinfo))
@@ -1217,7 +1537,13 @@ generate_bitmap_or_paths(PlannerInfo *root, RelOptInfo *rel,
 		 * the OR, else we can't use it.
 		 */
 		pathlist = NIL;
-		foreach(j, ((BoolExpr *) rinfo->orclause)->args)
+
+		/*
+		 * Group the similar OR-clause argument into decicated RestrictInfos,
+		 * because those RestrictInfos might match to the index as whole.
+		 */
+		groupedArgs = group_similar_or_args(root, rel, rinfo);
+		foreach(j, groupedArgs)
 		{
 			Node	   *orarg = (Node *) lfirst(j);
 			List	   *indlist;
@@ -1237,12 +1563,37 @@ generate_bitmap_or_paths(PlannerInfo *root, RelOptInfo *rel,
 															   andargs,
 															   all_clauses));
 			}
+			else if (restriction_is_or_clause(castNode(RestrictInfo, orarg)))
+			{
+				RestrictInfo *ri = castNode(RestrictInfo, orarg);
+
+				/*
+				 * Generate bitmap paths for the group of similar OR-clause
+				 * arguments.  In this case we need to immediately remove the
+				 * rinfo from other clauses.  This is because rinfo can be
+				 * transformed during index matching.  So, we might be unable
+				 * to remove that later.
+				 */
+				indlist = make_bitmap_paths_for_or_group(root,
+														 rel, ri,
+														 list_delete(all_clauses, rinfo));
+
+				if (indlist == NIL)
+				{
+					pathlist = NIL;
+					break;
+				}
+				else
+				{
+					pathlist = list_concat(pathlist, indlist);
+					continue;
+				}
+			}
 			else
 			{
 				RestrictInfo *ri = castNode(RestrictInfo, orarg);
 				List	   *orargs;
 
-				Assert(!restriction_is_or_clause(ri));
 				orargs = list_make1(ri);
 
 				indlist = build_paths_for_OR(root, rel,
diff --git a/src/test/regress/expected/create_index.out b/src/test/regress/expected/create_index.out
index c2b25936c8c..c6feef03810 100644
--- a/src/test/regress/expected/create_index.out
+++ b/src/test/regress/expected/create_index.out
@@ -1982,25 +1982,24 @@ SELECT count(*) FROM tenk1
 EXPLAIN (COSTS OFF)
 SELECT count(*) FROM tenk1
   WHERE hundred = 42 AND (thousand = 42 OR thousand = 99 OR tenthous < 2) OR thousand = 41;
-                                                       QUERY PLAN                                                       
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+                                                         QUERY PLAN                                                          
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Aggregate
    ->  Bitmap Heap Scan on tenk1
-         Recheck Cond: (((hundred = 42) AND ((thousand = 42) OR (thousand = 99) OR (tenthous < 2))) OR (thousand = 41))
+         Recheck Cond: (((hundred = 42) AND ((thousand = ANY ('{42,99}'::integer[])) OR (tenthous < 2))) OR (thousand = 41))
+         Filter: (((hundred = 42) AND ((thousand = 42) OR (thousand = 99) OR (tenthous < 2))) OR (thousand = 41))
          ->  BitmapOr
                ->  BitmapAnd
                      ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_hundred
                            Index Cond: (hundred = 42)
                      ->  BitmapOr
                            ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_thous_tenthous
-                                 Index Cond: (thousand = 42)
-                           ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_thous_tenthous
-                                 Index Cond: (thousand = 99)
+                                 Index Cond: (thousand = ANY ('{42,99}'::integer[]))
                            ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_thous_tenthous
                                  Index Cond: (tenthous < 2)
                ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_thous_tenthous
                      Index Cond: (thousand = 41)
-(16 rows)
+(15 rows)
 
 SELECT count(*) FROM tenk1
   WHERE hundred = 42 AND (thousand = 42 OR thousand = 99 OR tenthous < 2) OR thousand = 41;
@@ -2012,22 +2011,21 @@ SELECT count(*) FROM tenk1
 EXPLAIN (COSTS OFF)
 SELECT count(*) FROM tenk1
   WHERE hundred = 42 AND (thousand = 42 OR thousand = 41 OR thousand = 99 AND tenthous = 2);
-                                                       QUERY PLAN                                                        
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+                                                          QUERY PLAN                                                          
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Aggregate
    ->  Bitmap Heap Scan on tenk1
-         Recheck Cond: ((hundred = 42) AND ((thousand = 42) OR (thousand = 41) OR ((thousand = 99) AND (tenthous = 2))))
+         Recheck Cond: ((hundred = 42) AND (((thousand = 99) AND (tenthous = 2)) OR (thousand = ANY ('{42,41}'::integer[]))))
+         Filter: ((thousand = 42) OR (thousand = 41) OR ((thousand = 99) AND (tenthous = 2)))
          ->  BitmapAnd
                ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_hundred
                      Index Cond: (hundred = 42)
                ->  BitmapOr
-                     ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_thous_tenthous
-                           Index Cond: (thousand = 42)
-                     ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_thous_tenthous
-                           Index Cond: (thousand = 41)
                      ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_thous_tenthous
                            Index Cond: ((thousand = 99) AND (tenthous = 2))
-(13 rows)
+                     ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_thous_tenthous
+                           Index Cond: (thousand = ANY ('{42,41}'::integer[]))
+(12 rows)
 
 SELECT count(*) FROM tenk1
   WHERE hundred = 42 AND (thousand = 42 OR thousand = 41 OR thousand = 99 AND tenthous = 2);
diff --git a/src/test/regress/expected/join.out b/src/test/regress/expected/join.out
index abe98ff3c53..d26a93831d5 100644
--- a/src/test/regress/expected/join.out
+++ b/src/test/regress/expected/join.out
@@ -4226,20 +4226,20 @@ select * from tenk1 a join tenk1 b on
  Nested Loop
    Join Filter: (((a.unique1 = 1) AND (b.unique1 = 2)) OR ((a.unique2 = 3) AND (b.hundred = 4)))
    ->  Bitmap Heap Scan on tenk1 b
-         Recheck Cond: ((unique1 = 2) OR (hundred = 4))
+         Recheck Cond: ((hundred = 4) OR (unique1 = 2))
          ->  BitmapOr
-               ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_unique1
-                     Index Cond: (unique1 = 2)
                ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_hundred
                      Index Cond: (hundred = 4)
+               ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_unique1
+                     Index Cond: (unique1 = 2)
    ->  Materialize
          ->  Bitmap Heap Scan on tenk1 a
-               Recheck Cond: ((unique1 = 1) OR (unique2 = 3))
+               Recheck Cond: ((unique2 = 3) OR (unique1 = 1))
                ->  BitmapOr
-                     ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_unique1
-                           Index Cond: (unique1 = 1)
                      ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_unique2
                            Index Cond: (unique2 = 3)
+                     ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_unique1
+                           Index Cond: (unique1 = 1)
 (17 rows)
 
 explain (costs off)
@@ -4253,12 +4253,12 @@ select * from tenk1 a join tenk1 b on
          Filter: ((unique1 = 2) OR (ten = 4))
    ->  Materialize
          ->  Bitmap Heap Scan on tenk1 a
-               Recheck Cond: ((unique1 = 1) OR (unique2 = 3))
+               Recheck Cond: ((unique2 = 3) OR (unique1 = 1))
                ->  BitmapOr
-                     ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_unique1
-                           Index Cond: (unique1 = 1)
                      ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_unique2
                            Index Cond: (unique2 = 3)
+                     ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_unique1
+                           Index Cond: (unique1 = 1)
 (12 rows)
 
 explain (costs off)
@@ -4270,21 +4270,21 @@ select * from tenk1 a join tenk1 b on
  Nested Loop
    Join Filter: (((a.unique1 = 1) AND (b.unique1 = 2)) OR (((a.unique2 = 3) OR (a.unique2 = 7)) AND (b.hundred = 4)))
    ->  Bitmap Heap Scan on tenk1 b
-         Recheck Cond: ((unique1 = 2) OR (hundred = 4))
+         Recheck Cond: ((hundred = 4) OR (unique1 = 2))
          ->  BitmapOr
-               ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_unique1
-                     Index Cond: (unique1 = 2)
                ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_hundred
                      Index Cond: (hundred = 4)
+               ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_unique1
+                     Index Cond: (unique1 = 2)
    ->  Materialize
          ->  Bitmap Heap Scan on tenk1 a
-               Recheck Cond: ((unique1 = 1) OR (unique2 = ANY ('{3,7}'::integer[])))
+               Recheck Cond: ((unique2 = ANY ('{3,7}'::integer[])) OR (unique1 = 1))
                Filter: ((unique1 = 1) OR (unique2 = 3) OR (unique2 = 7))
                ->  BitmapOr
-                     ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_unique1
-                           Index Cond: (unique1 = 1)
                      ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_unique2
                            Index Cond: (unique2 = ANY ('{3,7}'::integer[]))
+                     ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_unique1
+                           Index Cond: (unique1 = 1)
 (18 rows)
 
 explain (costs off)
@@ -4296,21 +4296,21 @@ select * from tenk1 a join tenk1 b on
  Nested Loop
    Join Filter: (((a.unique1 = 1) AND (b.unique1 = 2)) OR (((a.unique2 = 3) OR (a.unique2 = 7)) AND (b.hundred = 4)))
    ->  Bitmap Heap Scan on tenk1 b
-         Recheck Cond: ((unique1 = 2) OR (hundred = 4))
+         Recheck Cond: ((hundred = 4) OR (unique1 = 2))
          ->  BitmapOr
-               ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_unique1
-                     Index Cond: (unique1 = 2)
                ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_hundred
                      Index Cond: (hundred = 4)
+               ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_unique1
+                     Index Cond: (unique1 = 2)
    ->  Materialize
          ->  Bitmap Heap Scan on tenk1 a
-               Recheck Cond: ((unique1 = 1) OR (unique2 = ANY ('{3,7}'::integer[])))
+               Recheck Cond: ((unique2 = ANY ('{3,7}'::integer[])) OR (unique1 = 1))
                Filter: ((unique1 = 1) OR (unique2 = 3) OR (unique2 = 7))
                ->  BitmapOr
-                     ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_unique1
-                           Index Cond: (unique1 = 1)
                      ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_unique2
                            Index Cond: (unique2 = ANY ('{3,7}'::integer[]))
+                     ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_unique1
+                           Index Cond: (unique1 = 1)
 (18 rows)
 
 explain (costs off)
@@ -4324,18 +4324,16 @@ select * from tenk1 a join tenk1 b on
    ->  Seq Scan on tenk1 b
    ->  Materialize
          ->  Bitmap Heap Scan on tenk1 a
-               Recheck Cond: ((unique1 < 20) OR (unique1 = 3) OR (unique1 = 1) OR (unique2 = ANY ('{3,7}'::integer[])))
+               Recheck Cond: ((unique2 = ANY ('{3,7}'::integer[])) OR (unique1 = ANY ('{3,1}'::integer[])) OR (unique1 < 20))
                Filter: ((unique1 < 20) OR (unique1 = 3) OR (unique1 = 1) OR (unique2 = 3) OR (unique2 = 7))
                ->  BitmapOr
-                     ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_unique1
-                           Index Cond: (unique1 < 20)
-                     ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_unique1
-                           Index Cond: (unique1 = 3)
-                     ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_unique1
-                           Index Cond: (unique1 = 1)
                      ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_unique2
                            Index Cond: (unique2 = ANY ('{3,7}'::integer[]))
-(16 rows)
+                     ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_unique1
+                           Index Cond: (unique1 = ANY ('{3,1}'::integer[]))
+                     ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_unique1
+                           Index Cond: (unique1 < 20)
+(14 rows)
 
 --
 -- test placement of movable quals in a parameterized join tree
diff --git a/src/tools/pgindent/typedefs.list b/src/tools/pgindent/typedefs.list
index 75fc05093cc..06c52fbf032 100644
--- a/src/tools/pgindent/typedefs.list
+++ b/src/tools/pgindent/typedefs.list
@@ -1763,6 +1763,7 @@ OprCacheKey
 OprInfo
 OprProofCacheEntry
 OprProofCacheKey
+OrArgIndexMatch
 OuterJoinClauseInfo
 OutputPluginCallbacks
 OutputPluginOptions
-- 
2.39.3 (Apple Git-145)



  [application/octet-stream] v30-0001-Transform-OR-clauses-to-SAOP-s-during-index-matc.patch (27.6K, ../CAPpHfdv9GrXfCOdPsMszBrORig+nW2+JBuMD-np_keVuKJ7bdQ@mail.gmail.com/3-v30-0001-Transform-OR-clauses-to-SAOP-s-during-index-matc.patch)
  download | inline diff:
From 07f2912a0a266fbf2dd0daa7b729b6584b4e3b9c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Alexander Korotkov <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2024 21:27:02 +0300
Subject: [PATCH v30 1/2] Transform OR-clauses to SAOP's during index matching

Replace "(indexkey op C1) OR (indexkey op C2) ... (indexkey op CN)" with
"indexkey op ANY(ARRAY[C1, C2, ...])" (ScalarArrayOpExpr node) during matching
a clause to index.

Here Ci is a i-th constant or parameters expression, 'expr' is non-constant
expression, 'op' is an operator which returns boolean result and has a commuter
(for the case of reverse order of constant and non-constant parts of the
expression, like 'Cn op expr').

This transformation allows to handle long OR-clauses with single IndexScan
avoiding slower bitmap scans.

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/567ED6CA.2040504%40sigaev.ru
Author: Alena Rybakina <[email protected]>
Author: Andrey Lepikhov <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Peter Geoghegan <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Ranier Vilela <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Alexander Korotkov <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Robert Haas <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Jian He <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Nikolay Shaplov <[email protected]>
---
 src/backend/optimizer/path/indxpath.c      | 258 +++++++++++++++++++++
 src/test/regress/expected/create_index.out | 183 +++++++++++++--
 src/test/regress/expected/join.out         |  57 ++++-
 src/test/regress/sql/create_index.sql      |  42 ++++
 src/test/regress/sql/join.sql              |   9 +
 5 files changed, 527 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/optimizer/path/indxpath.c b/src/backend/optimizer/path/indxpath.c
index c0fcc7d78df..0ca51bbbb19 100644
--- a/src/backend/optimizer/path/indxpath.c
+++ b/src/backend/optimizer/path/indxpath.c
@@ -19,10 +19,12 @@
 
 #include "access/stratnum.h"
 #include "access/sysattr.h"
+#include "catalog/namespace.h"
 #include "catalog/pg_am.h"
 #include "catalog/pg_operator.h"
 #include "catalog/pg_opfamily.h"
 #include "catalog/pg_type.h"
+#include "nodes/bitmapset.h"
 #include "nodes/makefuncs.h"
 #include "nodes/nodeFuncs.h"
 #include "nodes/supportnodes.h"
@@ -30,9 +32,14 @@
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
 #include "optimizer/pathnode.h"
 #include "optimizer/paths.h"
+#include "optimizer/planmain.h"
 #include "optimizer/prep.h"
 #include "optimizer/restrictinfo.h"
+#include "parser/parse_oper.h"
+#include "postgres_ext.h"
+#include "utils/array.h"
 #include "utils/lsyscache.h"
+#include "utils/syscache.h"
 #include "utils/selfuncs.h"
 
 
@@ -177,6 +184,10 @@ static IndexClause *match_rowcompare_to_indexcol(PlannerInfo *root,
 												 RestrictInfo *rinfo,
 												 int indexcol,
 												 IndexOptInfo *index);
+static IndexClause *match_orclause_to_indexcol(PlannerInfo *root,
+											   RestrictInfo *rinfo,
+											   int indexcol,
+											   IndexOptInfo *index);
 static IndexClause *expand_indexqual_rowcompare(PlannerInfo *root,
 												RestrictInfo *rinfo,
 												int indexcol,
@@ -2248,6 +2259,10 @@ match_clause_to_indexcol(PlannerInfo *root,
 	{
 		return match_rowcompare_to_indexcol(root, rinfo, indexcol, index);
 	}
+	else if (restriction_is_or_clause(rinfo))
+	{
+		return match_orclause_to_indexcol(root, rinfo, indexcol, index);
+	}
 	else if (index->amsearchnulls && IsA(clause, NullTest))
 	{
 		NullTest   *nt = (NullTest *) clause;
@@ -2771,6 +2786,249 @@ match_rowcompare_to_indexcol(PlannerInfo *root,
 	return NULL;
 }
 
+/*
+ * match_orclause_to_indexcol()
+ *	  Handles the OR-expr case for match_clause_to_indexcol() in the case
+ *	  when it could be transformed to ScalarArrayOpExpr.
+ */
+static IndexClause *
+match_orclause_to_indexcol(PlannerInfo *root,
+						   RestrictInfo *rinfo,
+						   int indexcol,
+						   IndexOptInfo *index)
+{
+	ListCell   *lc;
+	BoolExpr   *orclause = (BoolExpr *) rinfo->orclause;
+	Node	   *indexExpr = NULL;
+	List	   *consts = NIL;
+	Node	   *arrayNode = NULL;
+	ScalarArrayOpExpr *saopexpr = NULL;
+	HeapTuple	opertup;
+	Form_pg_operator operform;
+	Oid			matchOpno = InvalidOid;
+	IndexClause *iclause;
+	Oid			consttype = InvalidOid;
+	Oid			arraytype = InvalidOid;
+	Oid			inputcollid = InvalidOid;
+	bool		firstTime = true;
+	bool		have_param = false;
+
+	Assert(IsA(orclause, BoolExpr));
+	Assert(orclause->boolop == OR_EXPR);
+
+	/*
+	 * Iterate over OR entries.  Check that each OR entry is of the form:
+	 * (indexkey operator constant) or (constant operator indexkey). Operators
+	 * of all the entries must match.  Constant might be either Const or
+	 * Param.  Exit with NULL on first non-matching entry.
+	 */
+	foreach(lc, orclause->args)
+	{
+		RestrictInfo *subRinfo;
+		OpExpr	   *subClause;
+		Oid			opno;
+		Node	   *leftop,
+				   *rightop;
+		Node	   *constExpr;
+
+		if (!IsA(lfirst(lc), RestrictInfo))
+			return NULL;
+
+		subRinfo = (RestrictInfo *) lfirst(lc);
+
+		/* Only operator clauses scan match  */
+		if (!IsA(subRinfo->clause, OpExpr))
+			return NULL;
+
+		subClause = (OpExpr *) subRinfo->clause;
+		opno = subClause->opno;
+
+		/* Only binary operators can match  */
+		if (list_length(subClause->args) != 2)
+			return NULL;
+
+		/* RestrictInfo parameters dmust match parent */
+		if (subRinfo->is_pushed_down != rinfo->is_pushed_down ||
+			subRinfo->is_clone != rinfo->is_clone ||
+			subRinfo->security_level != rinfo->security_level ||
+			!bms_equal(subRinfo->required_relids, rinfo->required_relids) ||
+			!bms_equal(subRinfo->incompatible_relids, rinfo->incompatible_relids) ||
+			!bms_equal(subRinfo->outer_relids, rinfo->outer_relids))
+			return NULL;
+
+		/* Only operator returning boolean suits the transformation */
+		if (get_op_rettype(opno) != BOOLOID)
+			return NULL;
+
+		/*
+		 * Check for clauses of the form: (indexkey operator constant) or
+		 * (constant operator indexkey).  Determine indexkey side first, check
+		 * the constant later.
+		 */
+		leftop = (Node *) linitial(subClause->args);
+		rightop = (Node *) lsecond(subClause->args);
+		if (match_index_to_operand(leftop, indexcol, index))
+		{
+			indexExpr = leftop;
+			constExpr = rightop;
+		}
+		else if (match_index_to_operand(rightop, indexcol, index))
+		{
+			opno = get_commutator(opno);
+			if (!OidIsValid(opno))
+			{
+				/* commutator doesn't exist, we can't reverse the order */
+				return NULL;
+			}
+			indexExpr = rightop;
+			constExpr = leftop;
+		}
+		else
+		{
+			return NULL;
+		}
+
+		/*
+		 * Ignore any RelabelType node above the operands.  This is needed to
+		 * be able to apply indexscanning in binary-compatible-operator cases.
+		 * Note: we can assume there is at most one RelabelType node;
+		 * eval_const_expressions() will have simplified if more than one.
+		 */
+		if (IsA(constExpr, RelabelType))
+			constExpr = (Node *) ((RelabelType *) constExpr)->arg;
+		if (IsA(indexExpr, RelabelType))
+			indexExpr = (Node *) ((RelabelType *) indexExpr)->arg;
+
+		/* We allow constant to be Const or Param */
+		if (!IsA(constExpr, Const) && !IsA(constExpr, Param))
+			return NULL;
+
+		/* Forbid transformation for composite types, records. */
+		if (type_is_rowtype(exprType(constExpr)) ||
+			type_is_rowtype(exprType(indexExpr)))
+			return NULL;
+
+		/*
+		 * For the first matching qual, save information about operator, type
+		 * and collation.  For the other quals just check the match with the
+		 * first.
+		 */
+		if (firstTime)
+		{
+			matchOpno = opno;
+			consttype = exprType(constExpr);
+			arraytype = get_array_type(consttype);
+			inputcollid = subClause->inputcollid;
+
+			/*
+			 * There must be an array type in order to construct an array
+			 * later
+			 */
+			if (!OidIsValid(arraytype))
+				return NULL;
+			firstTime = false;
+		}
+		else
+		{
+			if (opno != matchOpno ||
+				inputcollid != subClause->inputcollid ||
+				consttype != exprType(constExpr))
+				return NULL;
+		}
+
+		if (IsA(constExpr, Param))
+			have_param = true;
+		consts = lappend(consts, constExpr);
+	}
+
+	if (have_param)
+	{
+		/*
+		 * We need to construct an ArrayExpr given we have Param's not just
+		 * Const's.
+		 */
+		ArrayExpr  *arrayExpr = makeNode(ArrayExpr);
+
+		/* array_collid will be set by parse_collate.c */
+		arrayExpr->element_typeid = consttype;
+		arrayExpr->array_typeid = arraytype;
+		arrayExpr->multidims = false;
+		arrayExpr->elements = consts;
+		arrayExpr->location = -1;
+
+		arrayNode = (Node *) arrayExpr;
+	}
+	else
+	{
+		/*
+		 * We have only Costs's.  In this case we can contruct an array
+		 * directly.
+		 */
+		int16		typlen;
+		bool		typbyval;
+		char		typalign;
+		Datum	   *elems;
+		int			i = 0;
+		ArrayType  *arrayConst;
+
+		get_typlenbyvalalign(consttype, &typlen, &typbyval, &typalign);
+
+		elems = (Datum *) palloc(sizeof(Datum) * list_length(consts));
+		foreach(lc, consts)
+			elems[i++] = ((Const *) lfirst(lc))->constvalue;
+
+		arrayConst = construct_array(elems, i, consttype,
+									 typlen, typbyval, typalign);
+		arrayNode = (Node *) makeConst(arraytype, -1, inputcollid,
+									   -1, PointerGetDatum(arrayConst),
+									   false, false);
+
+		pfree(elems);
+		list_free(consts);
+	}
+
+	/* Lookup for operator to fetch necessary information for the SAOP node */
+	opertup = SearchSysCache1(OPEROID,
+							  ObjectIdGetDatum(matchOpno));
+	if (!HeapTupleIsValid(opertup))
+		elog(ERROR, "cache lookup failed for operator %u", matchOpno);
+
+	operform = (Form_pg_operator) GETSTRUCT(opertup);
+
+	/* Build the SAOP expression node */
+	saopexpr = makeNode(ScalarArrayOpExpr);
+	saopexpr->opno = matchOpno;
+	saopexpr->opfuncid = operform->oprcode;
+	saopexpr->hashfuncid = InvalidOid;
+	saopexpr->negfuncid = InvalidOid;
+	saopexpr->useOr = true;
+	saopexpr->inputcollid = inputcollid;
+	saopexpr->args = list_make2(indexExpr, arrayNode);
+	saopexpr->location = -1;
+
+	ReleaseSysCache(opertup);
+
+	/*
+	 * Finally build an IndexClause based on the SAOP node.
+	 */
+	iclause = makeNode(IndexClause);
+	iclause->rinfo = make_restrictinfo(root,
+									   &saopexpr->xpr,
+									   rinfo->is_pushed_down,
+									   rinfo->has_clone,
+									   rinfo->is_clone,
+									   rinfo->pseudoconstant,
+									   rinfo->security_level,
+									   rinfo->required_relids,
+									   rinfo->incompatible_relids,
+									   rinfo->outer_relids);
+	iclause->indexquals = list_make1(iclause->rinfo);
+	iclause->lossy = false;
+	iclause->indexcol = indexcol;
+	iclause->indexcols = NIL;
+	return iclause;
+}
+
 /*
  * expand_indexqual_rowcompare --- expand a single indexqual condition
  *		that is a RowCompareExpr
diff --git a/src/test/regress/expected/create_index.out b/src/test/regress/expected/create_index.out
index cf6eac57349..c2b25936c8c 100644
--- a/src/test/regress/expected/create_index.out
+++ b/src/test/regress/expected/create_index.out
@@ -1844,18 +1844,11 @@ DROP TABLE onek_with_null;
 EXPLAIN (COSTS OFF)
 SELECT * FROM tenk1
   WHERE thousand = 42 AND (tenthous = 1 OR tenthous = 3 OR tenthous = 42);
-                                                               QUERY PLAN                                                                
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Bitmap Heap Scan on tenk1
-   Recheck Cond: (((thousand = 42) AND (tenthous = 1)) OR ((thousand = 42) AND (tenthous = 3)) OR ((thousand = 42) AND (tenthous = 42)))
-   ->  BitmapOr
-         ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_thous_tenthous
-               Index Cond: ((thousand = 42) AND (tenthous = 1))
-         ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_thous_tenthous
-               Index Cond: ((thousand = 42) AND (tenthous = 3))
-         ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_thous_tenthous
-               Index Cond: ((thousand = 42) AND (tenthous = 42))
-(9 rows)
+                                  QUERY PLAN                                  
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ Index Scan using tenk1_thous_tenthous on tenk1
+   Index Cond: ((thousand = 42) AND (tenthous = ANY ('{1,3,42}'::integer[])))
+(2 rows)
 
 SELECT * FROM tenk1
   WHERE thousand = 42 AND (tenthous = 1 OR tenthous = 3 OR tenthous = 42);
@@ -1864,14 +1857,166 @@ SELECT * FROM tenk1
       42 |    5530 |   0 |    2 |   2 |      2 |      42 |       42 |          42 |        42 |       42 |  84 |   85 | QBAAAA   | SEIAAA   | OOOOxx
 (1 row)
 
+EXPLAIN (COSTS OFF)
+SELECT * FROM tenk1
+  WHERE thousand = 42 AND (tenthous = 1 OR tenthous = (SELECT 1 + 2) OR tenthous = 42);
+                                       QUERY PLAN                                       
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ Index Scan using tenk1_thous_tenthous on tenk1
+   Index Cond: ((thousand = 42) AND (tenthous = ANY (ARRAY[1, (InitPlan 1).col1, 42])))
+   InitPlan 1
+     ->  Result
+(4 rows)
+
+SELECT * FROM tenk1
+  WHERE thousand = 42 AND (tenthous = 1 OR tenthous = (SELECT 1 + 2) OR tenthous = 42);
+ unique1 | unique2 | two | four | ten | twenty | hundred | thousand | twothousand | fivethous | tenthous | odd | even | stringu1 | stringu2 | string4 
+---------+---------+-----+------+-----+--------+---------+----------+-------------+-----------+----------+-----+------+----------+----------+---------
+      42 |    5530 |   0 |    2 |   2 |      2 |      42 |       42 |          42 |        42 |       42 |  84 |   85 | QBAAAA   | SEIAAA   | OOOOxx
+(1 row)
+
 EXPLAIN (COSTS OFF)
 SELECT count(*) FROM tenk1
   WHERE hundred = 42 AND (thousand = 42 OR thousand = 99);
-                                   QUERY PLAN                                    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+                                     QUERY PLAN                                     
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Aggregate
    ->  Bitmap Heap Scan on tenk1
-         Recheck Cond: ((hundred = 42) AND ((thousand = 42) OR (thousand = 99)))
+         Recheck Cond: ((hundred = 42) AND (thousand = ANY ('{42,99}'::integer[])))
+         ->  BitmapAnd
+               ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_hundred
+                     Index Cond: (hundred = 42)
+               ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_thous_tenthous
+                     Index Cond: (thousand = ANY ('{42,99}'::integer[]))
+(8 rows)
+
+SELECT count(*) FROM tenk1
+  WHERE hundred = 42 AND (thousand = 42 OR thousand = 99);
+ count 
+-------
+    10
+(1 row)
+
+EXPLAIN (COSTS OFF)
+SELECT * FROM tenk1
+  WHERE thousand = 42 AND (tenthous = 1 OR tenthous = 3 OR tenthous = 42);
+                                  QUERY PLAN                                  
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ Index Scan using tenk1_thous_tenthous on tenk1
+   Index Cond: ((thousand = 42) AND (tenthous = ANY ('{1,3,42}'::integer[])))
+(2 rows)
+
+SELECT * FROM tenk1
+  WHERE thousand = 42 AND (tenthous = 1 OR tenthous = 3 OR tenthous = 42);
+ unique1 | unique2 | two | four | ten | twenty | hundred | thousand | twothousand | fivethous | tenthous | odd | even | stringu1 | stringu2 | string4 
+---------+---------+-----+------+-----+--------+---------+----------+-------------+-----------+----------+-----+------+----------+----------+---------
+      42 |    5530 |   0 |    2 |   2 |      2 |      42 |       42 |          42 |        42 |       42 |  84 |   85 | QBAAAA   | SEIAAA   | OOOOxx
+(1 row)
+
+EXPLAIN (COSTS OFF)
+SELECT count(*) FROM tenk1
+  WHERE hundred = 42 AND (thousand = 42 OR thousand = 99);
+                                     QUERY PLAN                                     
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ Aggregate
+   ->  Bitmap Heap Scan on tenk1
+         Recheck Cond: ((hundred = 42) AND (thousand = ANY ('{42,99}'::integer[])))
+         ->  BitmapAnd
+               ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_hundred
+                     Index Cond: (hundred = 42)
+               ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_thous_tenthous
+                     Index Cond: (thousand = ANY ('{42,99}'::integer[]))
+(8 rows)
+
+SELECT count(*) FROM tenk1
+  WHERE hundred = 42 AND (thousand = 42 OR thousand = 99);
+ count 
+-------
+    10
+(1 row)
+
+EXPLAIN (COSTS OFF)
+SELECT count(*) FROM tenk1
+  WHERE hundred = 42 AND (thousand < 42 OR thousand < 99 OR 43 > thousand OR 42 > thousand);
+                                        QUERY PLAN                                        
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ Aggregate
+   ->  Bitmap Heap Scan on tenk1
+         Recheck Cond: ((hundred = 42) AND (thousand < ANY ('{42,99,43,42}'::integer[])))
+         ->  BitmapAnd
+               ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_hundred
+                     Index Cond: (hundred = 42)
+               ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_thous_tenthous
+                     Index Cond: (thousand < ANY ('{42,99,43,42}'::integer[]))
+(8 rows)
+
+SELECT count(*) FROM tenk1
+  WHERE hundred = 42 AND (thousand < 42 OR thousand < 99 OR 43 > thousand OR 42 > thousand);
+ count 
+-------
+    10
+(1 row)
+
+EXPLAIN (COSTS OFF)
+SELECT count(*) FROM tenk1
+  WHERE thousand = 42 AND (tenthous = 1 OR tenthous = 3) OR thousand = 41;
+                                               QUERY PLAN                                               
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ Aggregate
+   ->  Bitmap Heap Scan on tenk1
+         Recheck Cond: (((thousand = 42) AND (tenthous = ANY ('{1,3}'::integer[]))) OR (thousand = 41))
+         ->  BitmapOr
+               ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_thous_tenthous
+                     Index Cond: ((thousand = 42) AND (tenthous = ANY ('{1,3}'::integer[])))
+               ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_thous_tenthous
+                     Index Cond: (thousand = 41)
+(8 rows)
+
+SELECT count(*) FROM tenk1
+  WHERE thousand = 42 AND (tenthous = 1 OR tenthous = 3) OR thousand = 41;
+ count 
+-------
+    10
+(1 row)
+
+EXPLAIN (COSTS OFF)
+SELECT count(*) FROM tenk1
+  WHERE hundred = 42 AND (thousand = 42 OR thousand = 99 OR tenthous < 2) OR thousand = 41;
+                                                       QUERY PLAN                                                       
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ Aggregate
+   ->  Bitmap Heap Scan on tenk1
+         Recheck Cond: (((hundred = 42) AND ((thousand = 42) OR (thousand = 99) OR (tenthous < 2))) OR (thousand = 41))
+         ->  BitmapOr
+               ->  BitmapAnd
+                     ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_hundred
+                           Index Cond: (hundred = 42)
+                     ->  BitmapOr
+                           ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_thous_tenthous
+                                 Index Cond: (thousand = 42)
+                           ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_thous_tenthous
+                                 Index Cond: (thousand = 99)
+                           ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_thous_tenthous
+                                 Index Cond: (tenthous < 2)
+               ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_thous_tenthous
+                     Index Cond: (thousand = 41)
+(16 rows)
+
+SELECT count(*) FROM tenk1
+  WHERE hundred = 42 AND (thousand = 42 OR thousand = 99 OR tenthous < 2) OR thousand = 41;
+ count 
+-------
+    20
+(1 row)
+
+EXPLAIN (COSTS OFF)
+SELECT count(*) FROM tenk1
+  WHERE hundred = 42 AND (thousand = 42 OR thousand = 41 OR thousand = 99 AND tenthous = 2);
+                                                       QUERY PLAN                                                        
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ Aggregate
+   ->  Bitmap Heap Scan on tenk1
+         Recheck Cond: ((hundred = 42) AND ((thousand = 42) OR (thousand = 41) OR ((thousand = 99) AND (tenthous = 2))))
          ->  BitmapAnd
                ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_hundred
                      Index Cond: (hundred = 42)
@@ -1879,11 +2024,13 @@ SELECT count(*) FROM tenk1
                      ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_thous_tenthous
                            Index Cond: (thousand = 42)
                      ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_thous_tenthous
-                           Index Cond: (thousand = 99)
-(11 rows)
+                           Index Cond: (thousand = 41)
+                     ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_thous_tenthous
+                           Index Cond: ((thousand = 99) AND (tenthous = 2))
+(13 rows)
 
 SELECT count(*) FROM tenk1
-  WHERE hundred = 42 AND (thousand = 42 OR thousand = 99);
+  WHERE hundred = 42 AND (thousand = 42 OR thousand = 41 OR thousand = 99 AND tenthous = 2);
  count 
 -------
     10
diff --git a/src/test/regress/expected/join.out b/src/test/regress/expected/join.out
index 53f70d72ed6..abe98ff3c53 100644
--- a/src/test/regress/expected/join.out
+++ b/src/test/regress/expected/join.out
@@ -4278,15 +4278,64 @@ select * from tenk1 a join tenk1 b on
                      Index Cond: (hundred = 4)
    ->  Materialize
          ->  Bitmap Heap Scan on tenk1 a
-               Recheck Cond: ((unique1 = 1) OR (unique2 = 3) OR (unique2 = 7))
+               Recheck Cond: ((unique1 = 1) OR (unique2 = ANY ('{3,7}'::integer[])))
+               Filter: ((unique1 = 1) OR (unique2 = 3) OR (unique2 = 7))
                ->  BitmapOr
                      ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_unique1
                            Index Cond: (unique1 = 1)
                      ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_unique2
-                           Index Cond: (unique2 = 3)
+                           Index Cond: (unique2 = ANY ('{3,7}'::integer[]))
+(18 rows)
+
+explain (costs off)
+select * from tenk1 a join tenk1 b on
+  (a.unique1 = 1 and b.unique1 = 2) or
+  ((a.unique2 = 3 or a.unique2 = 7) and b.hundred = 4);
+                                                      QUERY PLAN                                                      
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ Nested Loop
+   Join Filter: (((a.unique1 = 1) AND (b.unique1 = 2)) OR (((a.unique2 = 3) OR (a.unique2 = 7)) AND (b.hundred = 4)))
+   ->  Bitmap Heap Scan on tenk1 b
+         Recheck Cond: ((unique1 = 2) OR (hundred = 4))
+         ->  BitmapOr
+               ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_unique1
+                     Index Cond: (unique1 = 2)
+               ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_hundred
+                     Index Cond: (hundred = 4)
+   ->  Materialize
+         ->  Bitmap Heap Scan on tenk1 a
+               Recheck Cond: ((unique1 = 1) OR (unique2 = ANY ('{3,7}'::integer[])))
+               Filter: ((unique1 = 1) OR (unique2 = 3) OR (unique2 = 7))
+               ->  BitmapOr
+                     ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_unique1
+                           Index Cond: (unique1 = 1)
                      ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_unique2
-                           Index Cond: (unique2 = 7)
-(19 rows)
+                           Index Cond: (unique2 = ANY ('{3,7}'::integer[]))
+(18 rows)
+
+explain (costs off)
+select * from tenk1 a join tenk1 b on
+  (a.unique1 < 20 or a.unique1 = 3 or a.unique1 = 1 and b.unique1 = 2) or
+  ((a.unique2 = 3 or a.unique2 = 7) and b.hundred = 4);
+                                                                         QUERY PLAN                                                                          
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ Nested Loop
+   Join Filter: ((a.unique1 < 20) OR (a.unique1 = 3) OR ((a.unique1 = 1) AND (b.unique1 = 2)) OR (((a.unique2 = 3) OR (a.unique2 = 7)) AND (b.hundred = 4)))
+   ->  Seq Scan on tenk1 b
+   ->  Materialize
+         ->  Bitmap Heap Scan on tenk1 a
+               Recheck Cond: ((unique1 < 20) OR (unique1 = 3) OR (unique1 = 1) OR (unique2 = ANY ('{3,7}'::integer[])))
+               Filter: ((unique1 < 20) OR (unique1 = 3) OR (unique1 = 1) OR (unique2 = 3) OR (unique2 = 7))
+               ->  BitmapOr
+                     ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_unique1
+                           Index Cond: (unique1 < 20)
+                     ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_unique1
+                           Index Cond: (unique1 = 3)
+                     ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_unique1
+                           Index Cond: (unique1 = 1)
+                     ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tenk1_unique2
+                           Index Cond: (unique2 = ANY ('{3,7}'::integer[]))
+(16 rows)
 
 --
 -- test placement of movable quals in a parameterized join tree
diff --git a/src/test/regress/sql/create_index.sql b/src/test/regress/sql/create_index.sql
index e296891cab8..f74ad415fbf 100644
--- a/src/test/regress/sql/create_index.sql
+++ b/src/test/regress/sql/create_index.sql
@@ -726,6 +726,24 @@ DROP TABLE onek_with_null;
 -- Check bitmap index path planning
 --
 
+EXPLAIN (COSTS OFF)
+SELECT * FROM tenk1
+  WHERE thousand = 42 AND (tenthous = 1 OR tenthous = 3 OR tenthous = 42);
+SELECT * FROM tenk1
+  WHERE thousand = 42 AND (tenthous = 1 OR tenthous = 3 OR tenthous = 42);
+
+EXPLAIN (COSTS OFF)
+SELECT * FROM tenk1
+  WHERE thousand = 42 AND (tenthous = 1 OR tenthous = (SELECT 1 + 2) OR tenthous = 42);
+SELECT * FROM tenk1
+  WHERE thousand = 42 AND (tenthous = 1 OR tenthous = (SELECT 1 + 2) OR tenthous = 42);
+
+EXPLAIN (COSTS OFF)
+SELECT count(*) FROM tenk1
+  WHERE hundred = 42 AND (thousand = 42 OR thousand = 99);
+SELECT count(*) FROM tenk1
+  WHERE hundred = 42 AND (thousand = 42 OR thousand = 99);
+
 EXPLAIN (COSTS OFF)
 SELECT * FROM tenk1
   WHERE thousand = 42 AND (tenthous = 1 OR tenthous = 3 OR tenthous = 42);
@@ -738,6 +756,30 @@ SELECT count(*) FROM tenk1
 SELECT count(*) FROM tenk1
   WHERE hundred = 42 AND (thousand = 42 OR thousand = 99);
 
+EXPLAIN (COSTS OFF)
+SELECT count(*) FROM tenk1
+  WHERE hundred = 42 AND (thousand < 42 OR thousand < 99 OR 43 > thousand OR 42 > thousand);
+SELECT count(*) FROM tenk1
+  WHERE hundred = 42 AND (thousand < 42 OR thousand < 99 OR 43 > thousand OR 42 > thousand);
+
+EXPLAIN (COSTS OFF)
+SELECT count(*) FROM tenk1
+  WHERE thousand = 42 AND (tenthous = 1 OR tenthous = 3) OR thousand = 41;
+SELECT count(*) FROM tenk1
+  WHERE thousand = 42 AND (tenthous = 1 OR tenthous = 3) OR thousand = 41;
+
+EXPLAIN (COSTS OFF)
+SELECT count(*) FROM tenk1
+  WHERE hundred = 42 AND (thousand = 42 OR thousand = 99 OR tenthous < 2) OR thousand = 41;
+SELECT count(*) FROM tenk1
+  WHERE hundred = 42 AND (thousand = 42 OR thousand = 99 OR tenthous < 2) OR thousand = 41;
+
+EXPLAIN (COSTS OFF)
+SELECT count(*) FROM tenk1
+  WHERE hundred = 42 AND (thousand = 42 OR thousand = 41 OR thousand = 99 AND tenthous = 2);
+SELECT count(*) FROM tenk1
+  WHERE hundred = 42 AND (thousand = 42 OR thousand = 41 OR thousand = 99 AND tenthous = 2);
+
 --
 -- Check behavior with duplicate index column contents
 --
diff --git a/src/test/regress/sql/join.sql b/src/test/regress/sql/join.sql
index d81ff63be53..4473b8f04d5 100644
--- a/src/test/regress/sql/join.sql
+++ b/src/test/regress/sql/join.sql
@@ -1433,6 +1433,15 @@ select * from tenk1 a join tenk1 b on
   (a.unique1 = 1 and b.unique1 = 2) or
   ((a.unique2 = 3 or a.unique2 = 7) and b.hundred = 4);
 
+explain (costs off)
+select * from tenk1 a join tenk1 b on
+  (a.unique1 = 1 and b.unique1 = 2) or
+  ((a.unique2 = 3 or a.unique2 = 7) and b.hundred = 4);
+explain (costs off)
+select * from tenk1 a join tenk1 b on
+  (a.unique1 < 20 or a.unique1 = 3 or a.unique1 = 1 and b.unique1 = 2) or
+  ((a.unique2 = 3 or a.unique2 = 7) and b.hundred = 4);
+
 --
 -- test placement of movable quals in a parameterized join tree
 --
-- 
2.39.3 (Apple Git-145)



view thread (2+ messages)

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], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: POC, WIP: OR-clause support for indexes
  In-Reply-To: <CAPpHfdv9GrXfCOdPsMszBrORig+nW2+JBuMD-np_keVuKJ7bdQ@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