agora inbox for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.orghelp / color / mirror / Atom feed
[PATCH v2 4/4] run pgindent 329+ messages / 2 participants [nested] [flat]
* [PATCH v2 4/4] run pgindent @ 2026-05-01 19:38 Nathan Bossart <nathan@postgresql.org> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-05-01 19:38 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dump.c | 457 ++++++++++++----------- src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dumpall.c | 30 +- src/bin/pg_upgrade/check.c | 16 +- src/bin/pg_upgrade/exec.c | 8 +- src/bin/pg_upgrade/multixact_rewrite.c | 80 ++-- src/bin/pg_upgrade/pg_upgrade.c | 2 +- src/bin/pg_upgrade/relfilenumber.c | 54 +-- src/bin/psql/command.c | 29 +- src/bin/psql/describe.c | 483 ++++++++++++------------- 9 files changed, 578 insertions(+), 581 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dump.c b/src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dump.c index eed9aaeb7c1..c05623b1889 100644 --- a/src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dump.c +++ b/src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dump.c @@ -1491,8 +1491,8 @@ setup_connection(Archive *AH, const char *dumpencoding, * Disable timeouts if supported. */ ExecuteSqlStatement(AH, "SET statement_timeout = 0"); - ExecuteSqlStatement(AH, "SET lock_timeout = 0"); - ExecuteSqlStatement(AH, "SET idle_in_transaction_session_timeout = 0"); + ExecuteSqlStatement(AH, "SET lock_timeout = 0"); + ExecuteSqlStatement(AH, "SET idle_in_transaction_session_timeout = 0"); if (AH->remoteVersion >= 170000) ExecuteSqlStatement(AH, "SET transaction_timeout = 0"); @@ -1505,10 +1505,10 @@ setup_connection(Archive *AH, const char *dumpencoding, /* * Adjust row-security mode, if supported. */ - if (dopt->enable_row_security) - ExecuteSqlStatement(AH, "SET row_security = on"); - else - ExecuteSqlStatement(AH, "SET row_security = off"); + if (dopt->enable_row_security) + ExecuteSqlStatement(AH, "SET row_security = on"); + else + ExecuteSqlStatement(AH, "SET row_security = off"); /* * For security reasons, we restrict the expansion of non-system views and @@ -1955,7 +1955,7 @@ checkExtensionMembership(DumpableObject *dobj, Archive *fout) if (fout->dopt->binary_upgrade) dobj->dump = ext->dobj.dump; else - dobj->dump = ext->dobj.dump_contains & (DUMP_COMPONENT_ACL); + dobj->dump = ext->dobj.dump_contains & (DUMP_COMPONENT_ACL); return true; } @@ -1989,9 +1989,9 @@ selectDumpableNamespace(NamespaceInfo *nsinfo, Archive *fout) else if (strcmp(nsinfo->dobj.name, "pg_catalog") == 0) { /* - * We dump out any ACLs defined in pg_catalog, if - * they are interesting (and not the original ACLs which were set at - * initdb time, see pg_init_privs). + * We dump out any ACLs defined in pg_catalog, if they are interesting + * (and not the original ACLs which were set at initdb time, see + * pg_init_privs). */ nsinfo->dobj.dump_contains = nsinfo->dobj.dump = DUMP_COMPONENT_ACL; } @@ -3298,7 +3298,7 @@ dumpDatabase(Archive *fout) "datcollate, datctype, datfrozenxid, " "datacl, acldefault('d', datdba) AS acldefault, " "datistemplate, datconnlimit, "); - appendPQExpBufferStr(dbQry, "datminmxid, "); + appendPQExpBufferStr(dbQry, "datminmxid, "); if (fout->remoteVersion >= 170000) appendPQExpBufferStr(dbQry, "datlocprovider, datlocale, datcollversion, "); else if (fout->remoteVersion >= 150000) @@ -3640,11 +3640,11 @@ dumpDatabase(Archive *fout) ii_oid, ii_relminmxid; - appendPQExpBuffer(loFrozenQry, "SELECT relfrozenxid, relminmxid, relfilenode, oid\n" - "FROM pg_catalog.pg_class\n" - "WHERE oid IN (%u, %u, %u, %u);\n", - LargeObjectRelationId, LargeObjectLOidPNIndexId, - LargeObjectMetadataRelationId, LargeObjectMetadataOidIndexId); + appendPQExpBuffer(loFrozenQry, "SELECT relfrozenxid, relminmxid, relfilenode, oid\n" + "FROM pg_catalog.pg_class\n" + "WHERE oid IN (%u, %u, %u, %u);\n", + LargeObjectRelationId, LargeObjectLOidPNIndexId, + LargeObjectMetadataRelationId, LargeObjectMetadataOidIndexId); lo_res = ExecuteSqlQuery(fout, loFrozenQry->data, PGRES_TUPLES_OK); @@ -4276,7 +4276,7 @@ getPolicies(Archive *fout, TableInfo tblinfo[], int numTables) printfPQExpBuffer(query, "SELECT pol.oid, pol.tableoid, pol.polrelid, pol.polname, pol.polcmd, "); - appendPQExpBufferStr(query, "pol.polpermissive, "); + appendPQExpBufferStr(query, "pol.polpermissive, "); appendPQExpBuffer(query, "CASE WHEN pol.polroles = '{0}' THEN NULL ELSE " " pg_catalog.array_to_string(ARRAY(SELECT pg_catalog.quote_ident(rolname) from pg_catalog.pg_roles WHERE oid = ANY(pol.polroles)), ', ') END AS polroles, " @@ -6635,9 +6635,9 @@ getAccessMethods(Archive *fout) * Select all access methods from pg_am table. */ appendPQExpBufferStr(query, "SELECT tableoid, oid, amname, "); - appendPQExpBufferStr(query, - "amtype, " - "amhandler::pg_catalog.regproc AS amhandler "); + appendPQExpBufferStr(query, + "amtype, " + "amhandler::pg_catalog.regproc AS amhandler "); appendPQExpBufferStr(query, "FROM pg_am"); res = ExecuteSqlQuery(fout, query->data, PGRES_TUPLES_OK); @@ -6829,35 +6829,35 @@ getAggregates(Archive *fout) * Find all interesting aggregates. See comment in getFuncs() for the * rationale behind the filtering logic. */ - agg_check = (fout->remoteVersion >= 110000 ? "p.prokind = 'a'" - : "p.proisagg"); + agg_check = (fout->remoteVersion >= 110000 ? "p.prokind = 'a'" + : "p.proisagg"); - appendPQExpBuffer(query, "SELECT p.tableoid, p.oid, " - "p.proname AS aggname, " - "p.pronamespace AS aggnamespace, " - "p.pronargs, p.proargtypes, " - "p.proowner, " - "p.proacl AS aggacl, " - "acldefault('f', p.proowner) AS acldefault " - "FROM pg_proc p " - "LEFT JOIN pg_init_privs pip ON " - "(p.oid = pip.objoid " - "AND pip.classoid = 'pg_proc'::regclass " - "AND pip.objsubid = 0) " - "WHERE %s AND (" - "p.pronamespace != " - "(SELECT oid FROM pg_namespace " - "WHERE nspname = 'pg_catalog') OR " - "p.proacl IS DISTINCT FROM pip.initprivs", - agg_check); - if (dopt->binary_upgrade) - appendPQExpBufferStr(query, - " OR EXISTS(SELECT 1 FROM pg_depend WHERE " - "classid = 'pg_proc'::regclass AND " - "objid = p.oid AND " - "refclassid = 'pg_extension'::regclass AND " - "deptype = 'e')"); - appendPQExpBufferChar(query, ')'); + appendPQExpBuffer(query, "SELECT p.tableoid, p.oid, " + "p.proname AS aggname, " + "p.pronamespace AS aggnamespace, " + "p.pronargs, p.proargtypes, " + "p.proowner, " + "p.proacl AS aggacl, " + "acldefault('f', p.proowner) AS acldefault " + "FROM pg_proc p " + "LEFT JOIN pg_init_privs pip ON " + "(p.oid = pip.objoid " + "AND pip.classoid = 'pg_proc'::regclass " + "AND pip.objsubid = 0) " + "WHERE %s AND (" + "p.pronamespace != " + "(SELECT oid FROM pg_namespace " + "WHERE nspname = 'pg_catalog') OR " + "p.proacl IS DISTINCT FROM pip.initprivs", + agg_check); + if (dopt->binary_upgrade) + appendPQExpBufferStr(query, + " OR EXISTS(SELECT 1 FROM pg_depend WHERE " + "classid = 'pg_proc'::regclass AND " + "objid = p.oid AND " + "refclassid = 'pg_extension'::regclass AND " + "deptype = 'e')"); + appendPQExpBufferChar(query, ')'); res = ExecuteSqlQuery(fout, query->data, PGRES_TUPLES_OK); @@ -6959,53 +6959,53 @@ getFuncs(Archive *fout) * include them, since we want to dump extension members individually in * that mode. Also, if they are used by casts or transforms then we need * to gather the information about them, though they won't be dumped if - * they are built-in. Also, include functions in - * pg_catalog if they have an ACL different from what's shown in - * pg_init_privs (so we have to join to pg_init_privs; annoying). + * they are built-in. Also, include functions in pg_catalog if they have + * an ACL different from what's shown in pg_init_privs (so we have to join + * to pg_init_privs; annoying). */ - not_agg_check = (fout->remoteVersion >= 110000 ? "p.prokind <> 'a'" - : "NOT p.proisagg"); + not_agg_check = (fout->remoteVersion >= 110000 ? "p.prokind <> 'a'" + : "NOT p.proisagg"); - appendPQExpBuffer(query, - "SELECT p.tableoid, p.oid, p.proname, p.prolang, " - "p.pronargs, p.proargtypes, p.prorettype, " - "p.proacl, " - "acldefault('f', p.proowner) AS acldefault, " - "p.pronamespace, " - "p.proowner " - "FROM pg_proc p " - "LEFT JOIN pg_init_privs pip ON " - "(p.oid = pip.objoid " - "AND pip.classoid = 'pg_proc'::regclass " - "AND pip.objsubid = 0) " - "WHERE %s" - "\n AND NOT EXISTS (SELECT 1 FROM pg_depend " - "WHERE classid = 'pg_proc'::regclass AND " - "objid = p.oid AND deptype = 'i')" - "\n AND (" - "\n pronamespace != " - "(SELECT oid FROM pg_namespace " - "WHERE nspname = 'pg_catalog')" - "\n OR EXISTS (SELECT 1 FROM pg_cast" - "\n WHERE pg_cast.oid > %u " - "\n AND p.oid = pg_cast.castfunc)" - "\n OR EXISTS (SELECT 1 FROM pg_transform" - "\n WHERE pg_transform.oid > %u AND " - "\n (p.oid = pg_transform.trffromsql" - "\n OR p.oid = pg_transform.trftosql))", - not_agg_check, - g_last_builtin_oid, - g_last_builtin_oid); - if (dopt->binary_upgrade) - appendPQExpBufferStr(query, - "\n OR EXISTS(SELECT 1 FROM pg_depend WHERE " - "classid = 'pg_proc'::regclass AND " - "objid = p.oid AND " - "refclassid = 'pg_extension'::regclass AND " - "deptype = 'e')"); + appendPQExpBuffer(query, + "SELECT p.tableoid, p.oid, p.proname, p.prolang, " + "p.pronargs, p.proargtypes, p.prorettype, " + "p.proacl, " + "acldefault('f', p.proowner) AS acldefault, " + "p.pronamespace, " + "p.proowner " + "FROM pg_proc p " + "LEFT JOIN pg_init_privs pip ON " + "(p.oid = pip.objoid " + "AND pip.classoid = 'pg_proc'::regclass " + "AND pip.objsubid = 0) " + "WHERE %s" + "\n AND NOT EXISTS (SELECT 1 FROM pg_depend " + "WHERE classid = 'pg_proc'::regclass AND " + "objid = p.oid AND deptype = 'i')" + "\n AND (" + "\n pronamespace != " + "(SELECT oid FROM pg_namespace " + "WHERE nspname = 'pg_catalog')" + "\n OR EXISTS (SELECT 1 FROM pg_cast" + "\n WHERE pg_cast.oid > %u " + "\n AND p.oid = pg_cast.castfunc)" + "\n OR EXISTS (SELECT 1 FROM pg_transform" + "\n WHERE pg_transform.oid > %u AND " + "\n (p.oid = pg_transform.trffromsql" + "\n OR p.oid = pg_transform.trftosql))", + not_agg_check, + g_last_builtin_oid, + g_last_builtin_oid); + if (dopt->binary_upgrade) appendPQExpBufferStr(query, - "\n OR p.proacl IS DISTINCT FROM pip.initprivs"); - appendPQExpBufferChar(query, ')'); + "\n OR EXISTS(SELECT 1 FROM pg_depend WHERE " + "classid = 'pg_proc'::regclass AND " + "objid = p.oid AND " + "refclassid = 'pg_extension'::regclass AND " + "deptype = 'e')"); + appendPQExpBufferStr(query, + "\n OR p.proacl IS DISTINCT FROM pip.initprivs"); + appendPQExpBufferChar(query, ')'); res = ExecuteSqlQuery(fout, query->data, PGRES_TUPLES_OK); @@ -7254,31 +7254,31 @@ getTables(Archive *fout, int *numTables) appendPQExpBufferStr(query, "c.relhasoids, "); - appendPQExpBufferStr(query, - "c.relispopulated, "); + appendPQExpBufferStr(query, + "c.relispopulated, "); - appendPQExpBufferStr(query, - "c.relreplident, "); + appendPQExpBufferStr(query, + "c.relreplident, "); - appendPQExpBufferStr(query, - "c.relrowsecurity, c.relforcerowsecurity, "); + appendPQExpBufferStr(query, + "c.relrowsecurity, c.relforcerowsecurity, "); - appendPQExpBufferStr(query, - "c.relminmxid, tc.relminmxid AS tminmxid, "); + appendPQExpBufferStr(query, + "c.relminmxid, tc.relminmxid AS tminmxid, "); - appendPQExpBufferStr(query, - "array_remove(array_remove(c.reloptions,'check_option=local'),'check_option=cascaded') AS reloptions, " - "CASE WHEN 'check_option=local' = ANY (c.reloptions) THEN 'LOCAL'::text " - "WHEN 'check_option=cascaded' = ANY (c.reloptions) THEN 'CASCADED'::text ELSE NULL END AS checkoption, "); + appendPQExpBufferStr(query, + "array_remove(array_remove(c.reloptions,'check_option=local'),'check_option=cascaded') AS reloptions, " + "CASE WHEN 'check_option=local' = ANY (c.reloptions) THEN 'LOCAL'::text " + "WHEN 'check_option=cascaded' = ANY (c.reloptions) THEN 'CASCADED'::text ELSE NULL END AS checkoption, "); - appendPQExpBufferStr(query, - "am.amname, "); + appendPQExpBufferStr(query, + "am.amname, "); - appendPQExpBufferStr(query, - "(d.deptype = 'i') IS TRUE AS is_identity_sequence, "); + appendPQExpBufferStr(query, + "(d.deptype = 'i') IS TRUE AS is_identity_sequence, "); - appendPQExpBufferStr(query, - "c.relispartition AS ispartition "); + appendPQExpBufferStr(query, + "c.relispartition AS ispartition "); /* * Left join to pg_depend to pick up dependency info linking sequences to @@ -7298,8 +7298,8 @@ getTables(Archive *fout, int *numTables) /* * Left join to pg_am to pick up the amname. */ - appendPQExpBufferStr(query, - "LEFT JOIN pg_am am ON (c.relam = am.oid)\n"); + appendPQExpBufferStr(query, + "LEFT JOIN pg_am am ON (c.relam = am.oid)\n"); /* * We purposefully ignore toast OIDs for partitioned tables; the reason is @@ -7870,8 +7870,8 @@ getIndexes(Archive *fout, TableInfo tblinfo[], int numTables) "t.reloptions AS indreloptions, "); - appendPQExpBufferStr(query, - "i.indisreplident, "); + appendPQExpBufferStr(query, + "i.indisreplident, "); if (fout->remoteVersion >= 110000) appendPQExpBufferStr(query, @@ -9315,8 +9315,8 @@ getTableAttrs(Archive *fout, TableInfo *tblinfo, int numTables) appendPQExpBufferStr(q, "'' AS attcompression,\n"); - appendPQExpBufferStr(q, - "a.attidentity,\n"); + appendPQExpBufferStr(q, + "a.attidentity,\n"); if (fout->remoteVersion >= 110000) appendPQExpBufferStr(q, @@ -10719,73 +10719,73 @@ getAdditionalACLs(Archive *fout) PQclear(res); /* Fetch initial-privileges data */ - printfPQExpBuffer(query, - "SELECT objoid, classoid, objsubid, privtype, initprivs " - "FROM pg_init_privs"); + printfPQExpBuffer(query, + "SELECT objoid, classoid, objsubid, privtype, initprivs " + "FROM pg_init_privs"); - res = ExecuteSqlQuery(fout, query->data, PGRES_TUPLES_OK); + res = ExecuteSqlQuery(fout, query->data, PGRES_TUPLES_OK); - ntups = PQntuples(res); - for (i = 0; i < ntups; i++) - { - Oid objoid = atooid(PQgetvalue(res, i, 0)); - Oid classoid = atooid(PQgetvalue(res, i, 1)); - int objsubid = atoi(PQgetvalue(res, i, 2)); - char privtype = *(PQgetvalue(res, i, 3)); - char *initprivs = PQgetvalue(res, i, 4); - CatalogId objId; - DumpableObject *dobj; + ntups = PQntuples(res); + for (i = 0; i < ntups; i++) + { + Oid objoid = atooid(PQgetvalue(res, i, 0)); + Oid classoid = atooid(PQgetvalue(res, i, 1)); + int objsubid = atoi(PQgetvalue(res, i, 2)); + char privtype = *(PQgetvalue(res, i, 3)); + char *initprivs = PQgetvalue(res, i, 4); + CatalogId objId; + DumpableObject *dobj; - objId.tableoid = classoid; - objId.oid = objoid; - dobj = findObjectByCatalogId(objId); - /* OK to ignore entries we haven't got a DumpableObject for */ - if (dobj) + objId.tableoid = classoid; + objId.oid = objoid; + dobj = findObjectByCatalogId(objId); + /* OK to ignore entries we haven't got a DumpableObject for */ + if (dobj) + { + /* Cope with sub-object initprivs */ + if (objsubid != 0) { - /* Cope with sub-object initprivs */ - if (objsubid != 0) - { - if (dobj->objType == DO_TABLE) - { - /* For a column initprivs, set the table's ACL flags */ - dobj->components |= DUMP_COMPONENT_ACL; - ((TableInfo *) dobj)->hascolumnACLs = true; - } - else - pg_log_warning("unsupported pg_init_privs entry: %u %u %d", - classoid, objoid, objsubid); - continue; - } - - /* - * We ignore any pg_init_privs.initprivs entry for the public - * schema, as explained in getNamespaces(). - */ - if (dobj->objType == DO_NAMESPACE && - strcmp(dobj->name, "public") == 0) - continue; - - /* Else it had better be of a type we think has ACLs */ - if (dobj->objType == DO_NAMESPACE || - dobj->objType == DO_TYPE || - dobj->objType == DO_FUNC || - dobj->objType == DO_AGG || - dobj->objType == DO_TABLE || - dobj->objType == DO_PROCLANG || - dobj->objType == DO_FDW || - dobj->objType == DO_FOREIGN_SERVER) + if (dobj->objType == DO_TABLE) { - DumpableObjectWithAcl *daobj = (DumpableObjectWithAcl *) dobj; - - daobj->dacl.privtype = privtype; - daobj->dacl.initprivs = pstrdup(initprivs); + /* For a column initprivs, set the table's ACL flags */ + dobj->components |= DUMP_COMPONENT_ACL; + ((TableInfo *) dobj)->hascolumnACLs = true; } else pg_log_warning("unsupported pg_init_privs entry: %u %u %d", classoid, objoid, objsubid); + continue; + } + + /* + * We ignore any pg_init_privs.initprivs entry for the public + * schema, as explained in getNamespaces(). + */ + if (dobj->objType == DO_NAMESPACE && + strcmp(dobj->name, "public") == 0) + continue; + + /* Else it had better be of a type we think has ACLs */ + if (dobj->objType == DO_NAMESPACE || + dobj->objType == DO_TYPE || + dobj->objType == DO_FUNC || + dobj->objType == DO_AGG || + dobj->objType == DO_TABLE || + dobj->objType == DO_PROCLANG || + dobj->objType == DO_FDW || + dobj->objType == DO_FOREIGN_SERVER) + { + DumpableObjectWithAcl *daobj = (DumpableObjectWithAcl *) dobj; + + daobj->dacl.privtype = privtype; + daobj->dacl.initprivs = pstrdup(initprivs); } + else + pg_log_warning("unsupported pg_init_privs entry: %u %u %d", + classoid, objoid, objsubid); } - PQclear(res); + } + PQclear(res); destroyPQExpBuffer(query); } @@ -11130,8 +11130,8 @@ dumpRelationStats_dumper(Archive *fout, const void *userArg, const TocEntry *te) * The results must be in the order of the relations supplied in the * parameters to ensure we remain in sync as we walk through the TOC. * - * For versions before 19, the redundant filter clause on s.tablename = - * ANY(...) seems sufficient to convince the planner to use + * For versions before 19, the redundant filter clause on s.tablename + * = ANY(...) seems sufficient to convince the planner to use * pg_class_relname_nsp_index, which avoids a full scan of pg_stats. * In newer versions, pg_stats returns the table OIDs, eliminating the * need for that hack. @@ -13471,11 +13471,11 @@ dumpFunc(Archive *fout, const FuncInfo *finfo) "pg_catalog.pg_get_function_result(p.oid) AS funcresult,\n" "proleakproof,\n"); - appendPQExpBufferStr(query, - "array_to_string(protrftypes, ' ') AS protrftypes,\n"); + appendPQExpBufferStr(query, + "array_to_string(protrftypes, ' ') AS protrftypes,\n"); - appendPQExpBufferStr(query, - "proparallel,\n"); + appendPQExpBufferStr(query, + "proparallel,\n"); if (fout->remoteVersion >= 110000) appendPQExpBufferStr(query, @@ -14965,9 +14965,9 @@ dumpCollation(Archive *fout, const CollInfo *collinfo) /* Get collation-specific details */ appendPQExpBufferStr(query, "SELECT "); - appendPQExpBufferStr(query, - "collprovider, " - "collversion, "); + appendPQExpBufferStr(query, + "collprovider, " + "collversion, "); if (fout->remoteVersion >= 120000) appendPQExpBufferStr(query, @@ -15374,23 +15374,23 @@ dumpAgg(Archive *fout, const AggInfo *agginfo) "pg_catalog.pg_get_function_arguments(p.oid) AS funcargs,\n" "pg_catalog.pg_get_function_identity_arguments(p.oid) AS funciargs,\n"); - appendPQExpBufferStr(query, - "aggkind,\n" - "aggmtransfn,\n" - "aggminvtransfn,\n" - "aggmfinalfn,\n" - "aggmtranstype::pg_catalog.regtype,\n" - "aggfinalextra,\n" - "aggmfinalextra,\n" - "aggtransspace,\n" - "aggmtransspace,\n" - "aggminitval,\n"); + appendPQExpBufferStr(query, + "aggkind,\n" + "aggmtransfn,\n" + "aggminvtransfn,\n" + "aggmfinalfn,\n" + "aggmtranstype::pg_catalog.regtype,\n" + "aggfinalextra,\n" + "aggmfinalextra,\n" + "aggtransspace,\n" + "aggmtransspace,\n" + "aggminitval,\n"); - appendPQExpBufferStr(query, - "aggcombinefn,\n" - "aggserialfn,\n" - "aggdeserialfn,\n" - "proparallel,\n"); + appendPQExpBufferStr(query, + "aggcombinefn,\n" + "aggserialfn,\n" + "aggdeserialfn,\n" + "proparallel,\n"); if (fout->remoteVersion >= 110000) appendPQExpBufferStr(query, @@ -16850,30 +16850,30 @@ dumpTable(Archive *fout, const TableInfo *tbinfo) appendPQExpBufferStr(query, "PREPARE getColumnACLs(pg_catalog.oid) AS\n"); - /* - * In principle we should call acldefault('c', relowner) to - * get the default ACL for a column. However, we don't - * currently store the numeric OID of the relowner in - * TableInfo. We could convert the owner name using regrole, - * but that creates a risk of failure due to concurrent role - * renames. Given that the default ACL for columns is empty - * and is likely to stay that way, it's not worth extra cycles - * and risk to avoid hard-wiring that knowledge here. - */ - appendPQExpBufferStr(query, - "SELECT at.attname, " - "at.attacl, " - "'{}' AS acldefault, " - "pip.privtype, pip.initprivs " - "FROM pg_catalog.pg_attribute at " - "LEFT JOIN pg_catalog.pg_init_privs pip ON " - "(at.attrelid = pip.objoid " - "AND pip.classoid = 'pg_catalog.pg_class'::pg_catalog.regclass " - "AND at.attnum = pip.objsubid) " - "WHERE at.attrelid = $1 AND " - "NOT at.attisdropped " - "AND (at.attacl IS NOT NULL OR pip.initprivs IS NOT NULL) " - "ORDER BY at.attnum"); + /* + * In principle we should call acldefault('c', relowner) to get + * the default ACL for a column. However, we don't currently + * store the numeric OID of the relowner in TableInfo. We could + * convert the owner name using regrole, but that creates a risk + * of failure due to concurrent role renames. Given that the + * default ACL for columns is empty and is likely to stay that + * way, it's not worth extra cycles and risk to avoid hard-wiring + * that knowledge here. + */ + appendPQExpBufferStr(query, + "SELECT at.attname, " + "at.attacl, " + "'{}' AS acldefault, " + "pip.privtype, pip.initprivs " + "FROM pg_catalog.pg_attribute at " + "LEFT JOIN pg_catalog.pg_init_privs pip ON " + "(at.attrelid = pip.objoid " + "AND pip.classoid = 'pg_catalog.pg_class'::pg_catalog.regclass " + "AND at.attnum = pip.objsubid) " + "WHERE at.attrelid = $1 AND " + "NOT at.attisdropped " + "AND (at.attacl IS NOT NULL OR pip.initprivs IS NOT NULL) " + "ORDER BY at.attnum"); ExecuteSqlStatement(fout, query->data); @@ -19167,7 +19167,7 @@ collectSequences(Archive *fout) * pg_get_sequence_data(), but we only do so for non-schema-only dumps. */ if (fout->remoteVersion < 180000 || - (!fout->dopt->dumpData && !fout->dopt->sequence_data)) + (!fout->dopt->dumpData && !fout->dopt->sequence_data)) query = "SELECT seqrelid, format_type(seqtypid, NULL), " "seqstart, seqincrement, " "seqmax, seqmin, " @@ -19229,15 +19229,14 @@ dumpSequence(Archive *fout, const TableInfo *tbinfo) qseqname = pg_strdup(fmtId(tbinfo->dobj.name)); /* - * The sequence information is gathered in a sorted - * table before any calls to dumpSequence(). See collectSequences() for - * more information. + * The sequence information is gathered in a sorted table before any calls + * to dumpSequence(). See collectSequences() for more information. */ - Assert(sequences); + Assert(sequences); - key.oid = tbinfo->dobj.catId.oid; - seq = bsearch(&key, sequences, nsequences, - sizeof(SequenceItem), SequenceItemCmp); + key.oid = tbinfo->dobj.catId.oid; + seq = bsearch(&key, sequences, nsequences, + sizeof(SequenceItem), SequenceItemCmp); /* Calculate default limits for a sequence of this type */ is_ascending = (seq->incby >= 0); diff --git a/src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dumpall.c b/src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dumpall.c index 5b10f7122b7..3f61196671c 100644 --- a/src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dumpall.c +++ b/src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dumpall.c @@ -954,11 +954,11 @@ dropRoles(PGconn *conn) int i_rolname; int i; - printfPQExpBuffer(buf, - "SELECT rolname " - "FROM %s " - "WHERE rolname !~ '^pg_' " - "ORDER BY 1", role_catalog); + printfPQExpBuffer(buf, + "SELECT rolname " + "FROM %s " + "WHERE rolname !~ '^pg_' " + "ORDER BY 1", role_catalog); res = executeQuery(conn, buf->data); @@ -1035,16 +1035,16 @@ dumpRoles(PGconn *conn) * Notes: rolconfig is dumped later, and pg_authid must be used for * extracting rolcomment regardless of role_catalog. */ - printfPQExpBuffer(buf, - "SELECT oid, rolname, rolsuper, rolinherit, " - "rolcreaterole, rolcreatedb, " - "rolcanlogin, rolconnlimit, rolpassword, " - "rolvaliduntil, rolreplication, rolbypassrls, " - "pg_catalog.shobj_description(oid, 'pg_authid') as rolcomment, " - "rolname = current_user AS is_current_user " - "FROM %s " - "WHERE rolname !~ '^pg_' " - "ORDER BY 2", role_catalog); + printfPQExpBuffer(buf, + "SELECT oid, rolname, rolsuper, rolinherit, " + "rolcreaterole, rolcreatedb, " + "rolcanlogin, rolconnlimit, rolpassword, " + "rolvaliduntil, rolreplication, rolbypassrls, " + "pg_catalog.shobj_description(oid, 'pg_authid') as rolcomment, " + "rolname = current_user AS is_current_user " + "FROM %s " + "WHERE rolname !~ '^pg_' " + "ORDER BY 2", role_catalog); res = executeQuery(conn, buf->data); diff --git a/src/bin/pg_upgrade/check.c b/src/bin/pg_upgrade/check.c index 0813cef2729..5f63e2114c8 100644 --- a/src/bin/pg_upgrade/check.c +++ b/src/bin/pg_upgrade/check.c @@ -1475,15 +1475,15 @@ check_for_incompatible_polymorphics(ClusterInfo *cluster) ", 'array_cat(anyarray,anyarray)'" ", 'array_prepend(anyelement,anyarray)'"); - appendPQExpBufferStr(&old_polymorphics, - ", 'array_remove(anyarray,anyelement)'" - ", 'array_replace(anyarray,anyelement,anyelement)'"); + appendPQExpBufferStr(&old_polymorphics, + ", 'array_remove(anyarray,anyelement)'" + ", 'array_replace(anyarray,anyelement,anyelement)'"); - appendPQExpBufferStr(&old_polymorphics, - ", 'array_position(anyarray,anyelement)'" - ", 'array_position(anyarray,anyelement,integer)'" - ", 'array_positions(anyarray,anyelement)'" - ", 'width_bucket(anyelement,anyarray)'"); + appendPQExpBufferStr(&old_polymorphics, + ", 'array_position(anyarray,anyelement)'" + ", 'array_position(anyarray,anyelement,integer)'" + ", 'array_positions(anyarray,anyelement)'" + ", 'width_bucket(anyelement,anyarray)'"); /* * The query below hardcodes FirstNormalObjectId as 16384 rather than diff --git a/src/bin/pg_upgrade/exec.c b/src/bin/pg_upgrade/exec.c index 479557abdcc..9a675929e17 100644 --- a/src/bin/pg_upgrade/exec.c +++ b/src/bin/pg_upgrade/exec.c @@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ get_bin_version(ClusterInfo *cluster) if (sscanf(cmd_output, "%*s %*s %d.%d", &v1, &v2) < 1) pg_fatal("could not get pg_ctl version output from %s", cmd); - cluster->bin_version = v1 * 10000; + cluster->bin_version = v1 * 10000; } @@ -344,8 +344,8 @@ check_data_dir(ClusterInfo *cluster) check_single_dir(pg_data, "pg_subtrans"); check_single_dir(pg_data, PG_TBLSPC_DIR); check_single_dir(pg_data, "pg_twophase"); - check_single_dir(pg_data, "pg_wal"); - check_single_dir(pg_data, "pg_xact"); + check_single_dir(pg_data, "pg_wal"); + check_single_dir(pg_data, "pg_xact"); } @@ -385,7 +385,7 @@ check_bin_dir(ClusterInfo *cluster, bool check_versions) */ get_bin_version(cluster); - check_exec(cluster->bindir, "pg_resetwal", check_versions); + check_exec(cluster->bindir, "pg_resetwal", check_versions); if (cluster == &new_cluster) { diff --git a/src/bin/pg_upgrade/multixact_rewrite.c b/src/bin/pg_upgrade/multixact_rewrite.c index c45b3183684..c7a1416494d 100644 --- a/src/bin/pg_upgrade/multixact_rewrite.c +++ b/src/bin/pg_upgrade/multixact_rewrite.c @@ -61,52 +61,52 @@ rewrite_multixacts(MultiXactId from_multi, MultiXactId to_multi) * Convert old multixids, if needed, by reading them one-by-one from the * old cluster. */ - old_reader = AllocOldMultiXactRead(old_cluster.pgdata, - old_cluster.controldata.chkpnt_nxtmulti, - old_cluster.controldata.chkpnt_nxtmxoff); + old_reader = AllocOldMultiXactRead(old_cluster.pgdata, + old_cluster.controldata.chkpnt_nxtmulti, + old_cluster.controldata.chkpnt_nxtmxoff); - for (MultiXactId multi = from_multi; multi != to_multi;) - { - MultiXactMember member; - bool multixid_valid; - - /* - * Read this multixid's members. - * - * Locking-only XIDs that may be part of multi-xids don't matter - * after upgrade, as there can be no transactions running across - * upgrade. So as a small optimization, we only read one member - * from each multixid: the one updating one, or if there was no - * update, arbitrarily the first locking xid. - */ - multixid_valid = GetOldMultiXactIdSingleMember(old_reader, multi, &member); + for (MultiXactId multi = from_multi; multi != to_multi;) + { + MultiXactMember member; + bool multixid_valid; - /* - * Write the new offset to pg_multixact/offsets. - * - * Even if this multixid is invalid, we still need to write its - * offset if the *previous* multixid was valid. That's because - * when reading a multixid, the number of members is calculated - * from the difference between the two offsets. - */ - RecordMultiXactOffset(offsets_writer, multi, - (multixid_valid || prev_multixid_valid) ? next_offset : 0); + /* + * Read this multixid's members. + * + * Locking-only XIDs that may be part of multi-xids don't matter after + * upgrade, as there can be no transactions running across upgrade. So + * as a small optimization, we only read one member from each + * multixid: the one updating one, or if there was no update, + * arbitrarily the first locking xid. + */ + multixid_valid = GetOldMultiXactIdSingleMember(old_reader, multi, &member); - /* Write the members */ - if (multixid_valid) - { - RecordMultiXactMembers(members_writer, next_offset, 1, &member); - next_offset += 1; - } + /* + * Write the new offset to pg_multixact/offsets. + * + * Even if this multixid is invalid, we still need to write its offset + * if the *previous* multixid was valid. That's because when reading + * a multixid, the number of members is calculated from the difference + * between the two offsets. + */ + RecordMultiXactOffset(offsets_writer, multi, + (multixid_valid || prev_multixid_valid) ? next_offset : 0); - /* Advance to next multixid, handling wraparound */ - multi++; - if (multi < FirstMultiXactId) - multi = FirstMultiXactId; - prev_multixid_valid = multixid_valid; + /* Write the members */ + if (multixid_valid) + { + RecordMultiXactMembers(members_writer, next_offset, 1, &member); + next_offset += 1; } - FreeOldMultiXactReader(old_reader); + /* Advance to next multixid, handling wraparound */ + multi++; + if (multi < FirstMultiXactId) + multi = FirstMultiXactId; + prev_multixid_valid = multixid_valid; + } + + FreeOldMultiXactReader(old_reader); /* Write the final 'next' offset to the last SLRU page */ RecordMultiXactOffset(offsets_writer, to_multi, diff --git a/src/bin/pg_upgrade/pg_upgrade.c b/src/bin/pg_upgrade/pg_upgrade.c index e5d7920c1b1..d8e1b680f5a 100644 --- a/src/bin/pg_upgrade/pg_upgrade.c +++ b/src/bin/pg_upgrade/pg_upgrade.c @@ -833,7 +833,7 @@ copy_xact_xlog_xid(void) * Determine the range of multixacts to convert. */ nxtmulti = old_cluster.controldata.chkpnt_nxtmulti; - oldstMulti = old_cluster.controldata.chkpnt_oldstMulti; + oldstMulti = old_cluster.controldata.chkpnt_oldstMulti; /* handle wraparound */ if (nxtmulti < FirstMultiXactId) nxtmulti = FirstMultiXactId; diff --git a/src/bin/pg_upgrade/relfilenumber.c b/src/bin/pg_upgrade/relfilenumber.c index ec2ff7acb21..6c467bdc8a5 100644 --- a/src/bin/pg_upgrade/relfilenumber.c +++ b/src/bin/pg_upgrade/relfilenumber.c @@ -587,32 +587,32 @@ transfer_relfile(FileNameMap *map, const char *type_suffix) /* Copying files might take some time, so give feedback. */ pg_log(PG_STATUS, "%s", old_file); - switch (user_opts.transfer_mode) - { - case TRANSFER_MODE_CLONE: - pg_log(PG_VERBOSE, "cloning \"%s\" to \"%s\"", - old_file, new_file); - cloneFile(old_file, new_file, map->nspname, map->relname); - break; - case TRANSFER_MODE_COPY: - pg_log(PG_VERBOSE, "copying \"%s\" to \"%s\"", - old_file, new_file); - copyFile(old_file, new_file, map->nspname, map->relname); - break; - case TRANSFER_MODE_COPY_FILE_RANGE: - pg_log(PG_VERBOSE, "copying \"%s\" to \"%s\" with copy_file_range", - old_file, new_file); - copyFileByRange(old_file, new_file, map->nspname, map->relname); - break; - case TRANSFER_MODE_LINK: - pg_log(PG_VERBOSE, "linking \"%s\" to \"%s\"", - old_file, new_file); - linkFile(old_file, new_file, map->nspname, map->relname); - break; - case TRANSFER_MODE_SWAP: - /* swap mode is handled in its own code path */ - pg_fatal("should never happen"); - break; - } + switch (user_opts.transfer_mode) + { + case TRANSFER_MODE_CLONE: + pg_log(PG_VERBOSE, "cloning \"%s\" to \"%s\"", + old_file, new_file); + cloneFile(old_file, new_file, map->nspname, map->relname); + break; + case TRANSFER_MODE_COPY: + pg_log(PG_VERBOSE, "copying \"%s\" to \"%s\"", + old_file, new_file); + copyFile(old_file, new_file, map->nspname, map->relname); + break; + case TRANSFER_MODE_COPY_FILE_RANGE: + pg_log(PG_VERBOSE, "copying \"%s\" to \"%s\" with copy_file_range", + old_file, new_file); + copyFileByRange(old_file, new_file, map->nspname, map->relname); + break; + case TRANSFER_MODE_LINK: + pg_log(PG_VERBOSE, "linking \"%s\" to \"%s\"", + old_file, new_file); + linkFile(old_file, new_file, map->nspname, map->relname); + break; + case TRANSFER_MODE_SWAP: + /* swap mode is handled in its own code path */ + pg_fatal("should never happen"); + break; + } } } diff --git a/src/bin/psql/command.c b/src/bin/psql/command.c index c9573d4b765..e5fb3595598 100644 --- a/src/bin/psql/command.c +++ b/src/bin/psql/command.c @@ -6272,23 +6272,22 @@ get_create_object_cmd(EditableObjectType obj_type, Oid oid, * ensure the right view gets replaced. Also, check relation kind * to be sure it's a view. * - * Views may have WITH [LOCAL|CASCADED] - * CHECK OPTION. These are not part of the view definition - * returned by pg_get_viewdef() and so need to be retrieved - * separately. Materialized views may have - * arbitrary storage parameter reloptions. + * Views may have WITH [LOCAL|CASCADED] CHECK OPTION. These are + * not part of the view definition returned by pg_get_viewdef() + * and so need to be retrieved separately. Materialized views may + * have arbitrary storage parameter reloptions. */ printfPQExpBuffer(query, "/* %s */\n", _("Get view's definition and details")); - appendPQExpBuffer(query, - "SELECT nspname, relname, relkind, " - "pg_catalog.pg_get_viewdef(c.oid, true), " - "pg_catalog.array_remove(pg_catalog.array_remove(c.reloptions,'check_option=local'),'check_option=cascaded') AS reloptions, " - "CASE WHEN 'check_option=local' = ANY (c.reloptions) THEN 'LOCAL'::text " - "WHEN 'check_option=cascaded' = ANY (c.reloptions) THEN 'CASCADED'::text ELSE NULL END AS checkoption " - "FROM pg_catalog.pg_class c " - "LEFT JOIN pg_catalog.pg_namespace n " - "ON c.relnamespace = n.oid WHERE c.oid = %u", - oid); + appendPQExpBuffer(query, + "SELECT nspname, relname, relkind, " + "pg_catalog.pg_get_viewdef(c.oid, true), " + "pg_catalog.array_remove(pg_catalog.array_remove(c.reloptions,'check_option=local'),'check_option=cascaded') AS reloptions, " + "CASE WHEN 'check_option=local' = ANY (c.reloptions) THEN 'LOCAL'::text " + "WHEN 'check_option=cascaded' = ANY (c.reloptions) THEN 'CASCADED'::text ELSE NULL END AS checkoption " + "FROM pg_catalog.pg_class c " + "LEFT JOIN pg_catalog.pg_namespace n " + "ON c.relnamespace = n.oid WHERE c.oid = %u", + oid); break; } diff --git a/src/bin/psql/describe.c b/src/bin/psql/describe.c index 76d299fb55c..389c4dce367 100644 --- a/src/bin/psql/describe.c +++ b/src/bin/psql/describe.c @@ -98,12 +98,12 @@ describeAggregates(const char *pattern, bool verbose, bool showSystem) gettext_noop("Result data type"), gettext_noop("Argument data types")); - appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, - " pg_catalog.obj_description(p.oid, 'pg_proc') as \"%s\"\n" - "FROM pg_catalog.pg_proc p\n" - " LEFT JOIN pg_catalog.pg_namespace n ON n.oid = p.pronamespace\n" - "WHERE p.prokind = " CppAsString2(PROKIND_AGGREGATE) "\n", - gettext_noop("Description")); + appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, + " pg_catalog.obj_description(p.oid, 'pg_proc') as \"%s\"\n" + "FROM pg_catalog.pg_proc p\n" + " LEFT JOIN pg_catalog.pg_namespace n ON n.oid = p.pronamespace\n" + "WHERE p.prokind = " CppAsString2(PROKIND_AGGREGATE) "\n", + gettext_noop("Description")); if (!showSystem && !pattern) appendPQExpBufferStr(&buf, " AND n.nspname <> 'pg_catalog'\n" @@ -379,19 +379,19 @@ describeFunctions(const char *functypes, const char *func_pattern, gettext_noop("stable"), gettext_noop("volatile"), gettext_noop("Volatility")); - appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, - ",\n CASE\n" - " WHEN p.proparallel = " - CppAsString2(PROPARALLEL_RESTRICTED) " THEN '%s'\n" - " WHEN p.proparallel = " - CppAsString2(PROPARALLEL_SAFE) " THEN '%s'\n" - " WHEN p.proparallel = " - CppAsString2(PROPARALLEL_UNSAFE) " THEN '%s'\n" - " END as \"%s\"", - gettext_noop("restricted"), - gettext_noop("safe"), - gettext_noop("unsafe"), - gettext_noop("Parallel")); + appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, + ",\n CASE\n" + " WHEN p.proparallel = " + CppAsString2(PROPARALLEL_RESTRICTED) " THEN '%s'\n" + " WHEN p.proparallel = " + CppAsString2(PROPARALLEL_SAFE) " THEN '%s'\n" + " WHEN p.proparallel = " + CppAsString2(PROPARALLEL_UNSAFE) " THEN '%s'\n" + " END as \"%s\"", + gettext_noop("restricted"), + gettext_noop("safe"), + gettext_noop("unsafe"), + gettext_noop("Parallel")); appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, ",\n pg_catalog.pg_get_userbyid(p.proowner) as \"%s\"" ",\n CASE WHEN prosecdef THEN '%s' ELSE '%s' END AS \"%s\"" @@ -591,8 +591,8 @@ describeFunctions(const char *functypes, const char *func_pattern, myopt.title = _("List of functions"); myopt.translate_header = true; - myopt.translate_columns = translate_columns; - myopt.n_translate_columns = lengthof(translate_columns); + myopt.translate_columns = translate_columns; + myopt.n_translate_columns = lengthof(translate_columns); printQuery(res, &myopt, pset.queryFout, false, pset.logfile); @@ -1078,38 +1078,38 @@ permissionsList(const char *pattern, bool showSystem) " ), E'\\n') AS \"%s\"", gettext_noop("Column privileges")); - appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, - ",\n pg_catalog.array_to_string(ARRAY(\n" - " SELECT polname\n" - " || CASE WHEN NOT polpermissive THEN\n" - " E' (RESTRICTIVE)'\n" - " ELSE '' END\n" - " || CASE WHEN polcmd != '*' THEN\n" - " E' (' || polcmd::pg_catalog.text || E'):'\n" - " ELSE E':'\n" - " END\n" - " || CASE WHEN polqual IS NOT NULL THEN\n" - " E'\\n (u): ' || pg_catalog.pg_get_expr(polqual, polrelid)\n" - " ELSE E''\n" - " END\n" - " || CASE WHEN polwithcheck IS NOT NULL THEN\n" - " E'\\n (c): ' || pg_catalog.pg_get_expr(polwithcheck, polrelid)\n" - " ELSE E''\n" - " END" - " || CASE WHEN polroles <> '{0}' THEN\n" - " E'\\n to: ' || pg_catalog.array_to_string(\n" - " ARRAY(\n" - " SELECT rolname\n" - " FROM pg_catalog.pg_roles\n" - " WHERE oid = ANY (polroles)\n" - " ORDER BY 1\n" - " ), E', ')\n" - " ELSE E''\n" - " END\n" - " FROM pg_catalog.pg_policy pol\n" - " WHERE polrelid = c.oid), E'\\n')\n" - " AS \"%s\"", - gettext_noop("Policies")); + appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, + ",\n pg_catalog.array_to_string(ARRAY(\n" + " SELECT polname\n" + " || CASE WHEN NOT polpermissive THEN\n" + " E' (RESTRICTIVE)'\n" + " ELSE '' END\n" + " || CASE WHEN polcmd != '*' THEN\n" + " E' (' || polcmd::pg_catalog.text || E'):'\n" + " ELSE E':'\n" + " END\n" + " || CASE WHEN polqual IS NOT NULL THEN\n" + " E'\\n (u): ' || pg_catalog.pg_get_expr(polqual, polrelid)\n" + " ELSE E''\n" + " END\n" + " || CASE WHEN polwithcheck IS NOT NULL THEN\n" + " E'\\n (c): ' || pg_catalog.pg_get_expr(polwithcheck, polrelid)\n" + " ELSE E''\n" + " END" + " || CASE WHEN polroles <> '{0}' THEN\n" + " E'\\n to: ' || pg_catalog.array_to_string(\n" + " ARRAY(\n" + " SELECT rolname\n" + " FROM pg_catalog.pg_roles\n" + " WHERE oid = ANY (polroles)\n" + " ORDER BY 1\n" + " ), E', ')\n" + " ELSE E''\n" + " END\n" + " FROM pg_catalog.pg_policy pol\n" + " WHERE polrelid = c.oid), E'\\n')\n" + " AS \"%s\"", + gettext_noop("Policies")); appendPQExpBufferStr(&buf, "\nFROM pg_catalog.pg_class c\n" " LEFT JOIN pg_catalog.pg_namespace n ON n.oid = c.relnamespace\n" @@ -1667,27 +1667,27 @@ describeOneTableDetails(const char *schemaname, char *footers[3] = {NULL, NULL, NULL}; printfPQExpBuffer(&buf, "/* %s */\n", _("Get sequence information")); - appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, - "SELECT pg_catalog.format_type(seqtypid, NULL) AS \"%s\",\n" - " seqstart AS \"%s\",\n" - " seqmin AS \"%s\",\n" - " seqmax AS \"%s\",\n" - " seqincrement AS \"%s\",\n" - " CASE WHEN seqcycle THEN '%s' ELSE '%s' END AS \"%s\",\n" - " seqcache AS \"%s\"\n", - gettext_noop("Type"), - gettext_noop("Start"), - gettext_noop("Minimum"), - gettext_noop("Maximum"), - gettext_noop("Increment"), - gettext_noop("yes"), - gettext_noop("no"), - gettext_noop("Cycles?"), - gettext_noop("Cache")); - appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, - "FROM pg_catalog.pg_sequence\n" - "WHERE seqrelid = '%s';", - oid); + appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, + "SELECT pg_catalog.format_type(seqtypid, NULL) AS \"%s\",\n" + " seqstart AS \"%s\",\n" + " seqmin AS \"%s\",\n" + " seqmax AS \"%s\",\n" + " seqincrement AS \"%s\",\n" + " CASE WHEN seqcycle THEN '%s' ELSE '%s' END AS \"%s\",\n" + " seqcache AS \"%s\"\n", + gettext_noop("Type"), + gettext_noop("Start"), + gettext_noop("Minimum"), + gettext_noop("Maximum"), + gettext_noop("Increment"), + gettext_noop("yes"), + gettext_noop("no"), + gettext_noop("Cycles?"), + gettext_noop("Cache")); + appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, + "FROM pg_catalog.pg_sequence\n" + "WHERE seqrelid = '%s';", + oid); res = PSQLexec(buf.data); if (!res) @@ -1905,7 +1905,7 @@ describeOneTableDetails(const char *schemaname, appendPQExpBufferStr(&buf, ",\n (SELECT c.collname FROM pg_catalog.pg_collation c, pg_catalog.pg_type t\n" " WHERE c.oid = a.attcollation AND t.oid = a.atttypid AND a.attcollation <> t.typcollation) AS attcollation"); attcoll_col = cols++; - appendPQExpBufferStr(&buf, ",\n a.attidentity"); + appendPQExpBufferStr(&buf, ",\n a.attidentity"); attidentity_col = cols++; if (pset.sversion >= 120000) appendPQExpBufferStr(&buf, ",\n a.attgenerated"); @@ -1916,11 +1916,11 @@ describeOneTableDetails(const char *schemaname, if (tableinfo.relkind == RELKIND_INDEX || tableinfo.relkind == RELKIND_PARTITIONED_INDEX) { - appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, ",\n CASE WHEN a.attnum <= (SELECT i.indnkeyatts FROM pg_catalog.pg_index i WHERE i.indexrelid = '%s') THEN '%s' ELSE '%s' END AS is_key", - oid, - gettext_noop("yes"), - gettext_noop("no")); - isindexkey_col = cols++; + appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, ",\n CASE WHEN a.attnum <= (SELECT i.indnkeyatts FROM pg_catalog.pg_index i WHERE i.indexrelid = '%s') THEN '%s' ELSE '%s' END AS is_key", + oid, + gettext_noop("yes"), + gettext_noop("no")); + isindexkey_col = cols++; appendPQExpBufferStr(&buf, ",\n pg_catalog.pg_get_indexdef(a.attrelid, a.attnum, TRUE) AS indexdef"); indexdef_col = cols++; } @@ -2315,7 +2315,7 @@ describeOneTableDetails(const char *schemaname, CppAsString2(CONSTRAINT_EXCLUSION) ") AND " "condeferred) AS condeferred,\n"); - appendPQExpBufferStr(&buf, "i.indisreplident,\n"); + appendPQExpBufferStr(&buf, "i.indisreplident,\n"); if (pset.sversion >= 150000) appendPQExpBufferStr(&buf, "i.indnullsnotdistinct,\n"); @@ -2420,7 +2420,7 @@ describeOneTableDetails(const char *schemaname, "pg_catalog.pg_get_indexdef(i.indexrelid, 0, true),\n " "pg_catalog.pg_get_constraintdef(con.oid, true), " "contype, condeferrable, condeferred"); - appendPQExpBufferStr(&buf, ", i.indisreplident"); + appendPQExpBufferStr(&buf, ", i.indisreplident"); appendPQExpBufferStr(&buf, ", c2.reltablespace"); if (pset.sversion >= 180000) appendPQExpBufferStr(&buf, ", con.conperiod"); @@ -2671,81 +2671,80 @@ describeOneTableDetails(const char *schemaname, PQclear(result); /* print any row-level policies */ - printfPQExpBuffer(&buf, "/* %s */\n", - _("Get row-level policies for this table")); - appendPQExpBufferStr(&buf, "SELECT pol.polname,"); - appendPQExpBufferStr(&buf, - " pol.polpermissive,\n"); - appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, - " CASE WHEN pol.polroles = '{0}' THEN NULL ELSE pg_catalog.array_to_string(array(select rolname from pg_catalog.pg_roles where oid = any (pol.polroles) order by 1),',') END,\n" - " pg_catalog.pg_get_expr(pol.polqual, pol.polrelid),\n" - " pg_catalog.pg_get_expr(pol.polwithcheck, pol.polrelid),\n" - " CASE pol.polcmd\n" - " WHEN 'r' THEN 'SELECT'\n" - " WHEN 'a' THEN 'INSERT'\n" - " WHEN 'w' THEN 'UPDATE'\n" - " WHEN 'd' THEN 'DELETE'\n" - " END AS cmd\n" - "FROM pg_catalog.pg_policy pol\n" - "WHERE pol.polrelid = '%s' ORDER BY 1;", - oid); + printfPQExpBuffer(&buf, "/* %s */\n", + _("Get row-level policies for this table")); + appendPQExpBufferStr(&buf, "SELECT pol.polname,"); + appendPQExpBufferStr(&buf, + " pol.polpermissive,\n"); + appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, + " CASE WHEN pol.polroles = '{0}' THEN NULL ELSE pg_catalog.array_to_string(array(select rolname from pg_catalog.pg_roles where oid = any (pol.polroles) order by 1),',') END,\n" + " pg_catalog.pg_get_expr(pol.polqual, pol.polrelid),\n" + " pg_catalog.pg_get_expr(pol.polwithcheck, pol.polrelid),\n" + " CASE pol.polcmd\n" + " WHEN 'r' THEN 'SELECT'\n" + " WHEN 'a' THEN 'INSERT'\n" + " WHEN 'w' THEN 'UPDATE'\n" + " WHEN 'd' THEN 'DELETE'\n" + " END AS cmd\n" + "FROM pg_catalog.pg_policy pol\n" + "WHERE pol.polrelid = '%s' ORDER BY 1;", + oid); - result = PSQLexec(buf.data); - if (!result) - goto error_return; - else - tuples = PQntuples(result); + result = PSQLexec(buf.data); + if (!result) + goto error_return; + else + tuples = PQntuples(result); - /* - * Handle cases where RLS is enabled and there are policies, or - * there aren't policies, or RLS isn't enabled but there are - * policies - */ - if (tableinfo.rowsecurity && !tableinfo.forcerowsecurity && tuples > 0) - printTableAddFooter(&cont, _("Policies:")); + /* + * Handle cases where RLS is enabled and there are policies, or there + * aren't policies, or RLS isn't enabled but there are policies + */ + if (tableinfo.rowsecurity && !tableinfo.forcerowsecurity && tuples > 0) + printTableAddFooter(&cont, _("Policies:")); - if (tableinfo.rowsecurity && tableinfo.forcerowsecurity && tuples > 0) - printTableAddFooter(&cont, _("Policies (forced row security enabled):")); + if (tableinfo.rowsecurity && tableinfo.forcerowsecurity && tuples > 0) + printTableAddFooter(&cont, _("Policies (forced row security enabled):")); - if (tableinfo.rowsecurity && !tableinfo.forcerowsecurity && tuples == 0) - printTableAddFooter(&cont, _("Policies (row security enabled): (none)")); + if (tableinfo.rowsecurity && !tableinfo.forcerowsecurity && tuples == 0) + printTableAddFooter(&cont, _("Policies (row security enabled): (none)")); - if (tableinfo.rowsecurity && tableinfo.forcerowsecurity && tuples == 0) - printTableAddFooter(&cont, _("Policies (forced row security enabled): (none)")); + if (tableinfo.rowsecurity && tableinfo.forcerowsecurity && tuples == 0) + printTableAddFooter(&cont, _("Policies (forced row security enabled): (none)")); - if (!tableinfo.rowsecurity && tuples > 0) - printTableAddFooter(&cont, _("Policies (row security disabled):")); + if (!tableinfo.rowsecurity && tuples > 0) + printTableAddFooter(&cont, _("Policies (row security disabled):")); - /* Might be an empty set - that's ok */ - for (i = 0; i < tuples; i++) - { - printfPQExpBuffer(&buf, " POLICY \"%s\"", - PQgetvalue(result, i, 0)); + /* Might be an empty set - that's ok */ + for (i = 0; i < tuples; i++) + { + printfPQExpBuffer(&buf, " POLICY \"%s\"", + PQgetvalue(result, i, 0)); - if (*(PQgetvalue(result, i, 1)) == 'f') - appendPQExpBufferStr(&buf, " AS RESTRICTIVE"); + if (*(PQgetvalue(result, i, 1)) == 'f') + appendPQExpBufferStr(&buf, " AS RESTRICTIVE"); - if (!PQgetisnull(result, i, 5)) - appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, " FOR %s", - PQgetvalue(result, i, 5)); + if (!PQgetisnull(result, i, 5)) + appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, " FOR %s", + PQgetvalue(result, i, 5)); - if (!PQgetisnull(result, i, 2)) - { - appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, "\n TO %s", - PQgetvalue(result, i, 2)); - } + if (!PQgetisnull(result, i, 2)) + { + appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, "\n TO %s", + PQgetvalue(result, i, 2)); + } - if (!PQgetisnull(result, i, 3)) - appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, "\n USING (%s)", - PQgetvalue(result, i, 3)); + if (!PQgetisnull(result, i, 3)) + appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, "\n USING (%s)", + PQgetvalue(result, i, 3)); - if (!PQgetisnull(result, i, 4)) - appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, "\n WITH CHECK (%s)", - PQgetvalue(result, i, 4)); + if (!PQgetisnull(result, i, 4)) + appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, "\n WITH CHECK (%s)", + PQgetvalue(result, i, 4)); - printTableAddFooter(&cont, buf.data); - } - PQclear(result); + printTableAddFooter(&cont, buf.data); + } + PQclear(result); /* print any extended statistics */ if (pset.sversion >= 140000) @@ -3014,115 +3013,115 @@ describeOneTableDetails(const char *schemaname, } /* print any publications */ - printfPQExpBuffer(&buf, "/* %s */\n", - _("Get publications that publish this table")); - if (pset.sversion >= 150000) + printfPQExpBuffer(&buf, "/* %s */\n", + _("Get publications that publish this table")); + if (pset.sversion >= 150000) + { + appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, + "SELECT pubname\n" + " , NULL\n" + " , NULL\n" + "FROM pg_catalog.pg_publication p\n" + " JOIN pg_catalog.pg_publication_namespace pn ON p.oid = pn.pnpubid\n" + " JOIN pg_catalog.pg_class pc ON pc.relnamespace = pn.pnnspid\n" + "WHERE pc.oid ='%s' and pg_catalog.pg_relation_is_publishable('%s')\n" + "UNION\n" + "SELECT pubname\n" + " , pg_get_expr(pr.prqual, c.oid)\n" + " , (CASE WHEN pr.prattrs IS NOT NULL THEN\n" + " (SELECT string_agg(attname, ', ')\n" + " FROM pg_catalog.generate_series(0, pg_catalog.array_upper(pr.prattrs::pg_catalog.int2[], 1)) s,\n" + " pg_catalog.pg_attribute\n" + " WHERE attrelid = pr.prrelid AND attnum = prattrs[s])\n" + " ELSE NULL END) " + "FROM pg_catalog.pg_publication p\n" + " JOIN pg_catalog.pg_publication_rel pr ON p.oid = pr.prpubid\n" + " JOIN pg_catalog.pg_class c ON c.oid = pr.prrelid\n" + "WHERE pr.prrelid = '%s'\n", + oid, oid, oid); + + if (pset.sversion >= 190000) { + /* + * Skip entries where this relation appears in the + * publication's EXCEPT list. + */ appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, + " AND NOT pr.prexcept\n" + "UNION\n" "SELECT pubname\n" " , NULL\n" " , NULL\n" "FROM pg_catalog.pg_publication p\n" - " JOIN pg_catalog.pg_publication_namespace pn ON p.oid = pn.pnpubid\n" - " JOIN pg_catalog.pg_class pc ON pc.relnamespace = pn.pnnspid\n" - "WHERE pc.oid ='%s' and pg_catalog.pg_relation_is_publishable('%s')\n" - "UNION\n" - "SELECT pubname\n" - " , pg_get_expr(pr.prqual, c.oid)\n" - " , (CASE WHEN pr.prattrs IS NOT NULL THEN\n" - " (SELECT string_agg(attname, ', ')\n" - " FROM pg_catalog.generate_series(0, pg_catalog.array_upper(pr.prattrs::pg_catalog.int2[], 1)) s,\n" - " pg_catalog.pg_attribute\n" - " WHERE attrelid = pr.prrelid AND attnum = prattrs[s])\n" - " ELSE NULL END) " - "FROM pg_catalog.pg_publication p\n" - " JOIN pg_catalog.pg_publication_rel pr ON p.oid = pr.prpubid\n" - " JOIN pg_catalog.pg_class c ON c.oid = pr.prrelid\n" - "WHERE pr.prrelid = '%s'\n", + "WHERE p.puballtables AND pg_catalog.pg_relation_is_publishable('%s')\n" + " AND NOT EXISTS (\n" + " SELECT 1\n" + " FROM pg_catalog.pg_publication_rel pr\n" + " WHERE pr.prpubid = p.oid AND\n" + " (pr.prrelid = '%s' OR pr.prrelid = pg_catalog.pg_partition_root('%s')))\n" + "ORDER BY 1;", oid, oid, oid); - - if (pset.sversion >= 190000) - { - /* - * Skip entries where this relation appears in the - * publication's EXCEPT list. - */ - appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, - " AND NOT pr.prexcept\n" - "UNION\n" - "SELECT pubname\n" - " , NULL\n" - " , NULL\n" - "FROM pg_catalog.pg_publication p\n" - "WHERE p.puballtables AND pg_catalog.pg_relation_is_publishable('%s')\n" - " AND NOT EXISTS (\n" - " SELECT 1\n" - " FROM pg_catalog.pg_publication_rel pr\n" - " WHERE pr.prpubid = p.oid AND\n" - " (pr.prrelid = '%s' OR pr.prrelid = pg_catalog.pg_partition_root('%s')))\n" - "ORDER BY 1;", - oid, oid, oid); - } - else - { - appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, - "UNION\n" - "SELECT pubname\n" - " , NULL\n" - " , NULL\n" - "FROM pg_catalog.pg_publication p\n" - "WHERE p.puballtables AND pg_catalog.pg_relation_is_publishable('%s')\n" - "ORDER BY 1;", - oid); - } } else { appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, + "UNION\n" "SELECT pubname\n" - " , NULL\n" - " , NULL\n" - "FROM pg_catalog.pg_publication p\n" - "JOIN pg_catalog.pg_publication_rel pr ON p.oid = pr.prpubid\n" - "WHERE pr.prrelid = '%s'\n" - "UNION ALL\n" - "SELECT pubname\n" - " , NULL\n" - " , NULL\n" + " , NULL\n" + " , NULL\n" "FROM pg_catalog.pg_publication p\n" "WHERE p.puballtables AND pg_catalog.pg_relation_is_publishable('%s')\n" "ORDER BY 1;", - oid, oid); + oid); } + } + else + { + appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, + "SELECT pubname\n" + " , NULL\n" + " , NULL\n" + "FROM pg_catalog.pg_publication p\n" + "JOIN pg_catalog.pg_publication_rel pr ON p.oid = pr.prpubid\n" + "WHERE pr.prrelid = '%s'\n" + "UNION ALL\n" + "SELECT pubname\n" + " , NULL\n" + " , NULL\n" + "FROM pg_catalog.pg_publication p\n" + "WHERE p.puballtables AND pg_catalog.pg_relation_is_publishable('%s')\n" + "ORDER BY 1;", + oid, oid); + } - result = PSQLexec(buf.data); - if (!result) - goto error_return; - else - tuples = PQntuples(result); + result = PSQLexec(buf.data); + if (!result) + goto error_return; + else + tuples = PQntuples(result); - if (tuples > 0) - printTableAddFooter(&cont, _("Included in publications:")); + if (tuples > 0) + printTableAddFooter(&cont, _("Included in publications:")); - /* Might be an empty set - that's ok */ - for (i = 0; i < tuples; i++) - { - printfPQExpBuffer(&buf, " \"%s\"", - PQgetvalue(result, i, 0)); + /* Might be an empty set - that's ok */ + for (i = 0; i < tuples; i++) + { + printfPQExpBuffer(&buf, " \"%s\"", + PQgetvalue(result, i, 0)); - /* column list (if any) */ - if (!PQgetisnull(result, i, 2)) - appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, " (%s)", - PQgetvalue(result, i, 2)); + /* column list (if any) */ + if (!PQgetisnull(result, i, 2)) + appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, " (%s)", + PQgetvalue(result, i, 2)); - /* row filter (if any) */ - if (!PQgetisnull(result, i, 1)) - appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, " WHERE %s", - PQgetvalue(result, i, 1)); + /* row filter (if any) */ + if (!PQgetisnull(result, i, 1)) + appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, " WHERE %s", + PQgetvalue(result, i, 1)); - printTableAddFooter(&cont, buf.data); - } - PQclear(result); + printTableAddFooter(&cont, buf.data); + } + PQclear(result); /* Print publications where the table is in the EXCEPT clause */ if (pset.sversion >= 190000) @@ -3794,7 +3793,7 @@ describeRoles(const char *pattern, bool verbose, bool showSystem) ncols++; } appendPQExpBufferStr(&buf, "\n, r.rolreplication"); - appendPQExpBufferStr(&buf, "\n, r.rolbypassrls"); + appendPQExpBufferStr(&buf, "\n, r.rolbypassrls"); appendPQExpBufferStr(&buf, "\nFROM pg_catalog.pg_roles r\n"); @@ -3849,8 +3848,8 @@ describeRoles(const char *pattern, bool verbose, bool showSystem) if (strcmp(PQgetvalue(res, i, (verbose ? 9 : 8)), "t") == 0) add_role_attribute(&buf, _("Replication")); - if (strcmp(PQgetvalue(res, i, (verbose ? 10 : 9)), "t") == 0) - add_role_attribute(&buf, _("Bypass RLS")); + if (strcmp(PQgetvalue(res, i, (verbose ? 10 : 9)), "t") == 0) + add_role_attribute(&buf, _("Bypass RLS")); conns = atoi(PQgetvalue(res, i, 6)); if (conns >= 0) @@ -5144,14 +5143,14 @@ listCollations(const char *pattern, bool verbose, bool showSystem) gettext_noop("Schema"), gettext_noop("Name")); - appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, - " CASE c.collprovider " - "WHEN " CppAsString2(COLLPROVIDER_DEFAULT) " THEN 'default' " - "WHEN " CppAsString2(COLLPROVIDER_BUILTIN) " THEN 'builtin' " - "WHEN " CppAsString2(COLLPROVIDER_LIBC) " THEN 'libc' " - "WHEN " CppAsString2(COLLPROVIDER_ICU) " THEN 'icu' " - "END AS \"%s\",\n", - gettext_noop("Provider")); + appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, + " CASE c.collprovider " + "WHEN " CppAsString2(COLLPROVIDER_DEFAULT) " THEN 'default' " + "WHEN " CppAsString2(COLLPROVIDER_BUILTIN) " THEN 'builtin' " + "WHEN " CppAsString2(COLLPROVIDER_LIBC) " THEN 'libc' " + "WHEN " CppAsString2(COLLPROVIDER_ICU) " THEN 'icu' " + "END AS \"%s\",\n", + gettext_noop("Provider")); appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, " c.collcollate AS \"%s\",\n" -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --CT89ko5pLUrsvFtH-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2026-07-01 13:18 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 329+ messages (download: mbox mbox.gz follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2026-05-01 19:38 [PATCH v2 4/4] run pgindent Nathan Bossart <nathan@postgresql.org> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 2026-07-01 13:18 [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at>
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox