agora inbox for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.orghelp / color / mirror / Atom feed
[PATCH v17 7/8] Row pattern recognition patch (tests). 329+ messages / 2 participants [nested] [flat]
* [PATCH v17 7/8] Row pattern recognition patch (tests). @ 2024-04-28 11:00 Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@postgresql.org> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Tatsuo Ishii @ 2024-04-28 11:00 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/test/regress/expected/rpr.out | 821 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ src/test/regress/parallel_schedule | 2 +- src/test/regress/sql/rpr.sql | 392 ++++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 1214 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) create mode 100644 src/test/regress/expected/rpr.out create mode 100644 src/test/regress/sql/rpr.sql diff --git a/src/test/regress/expected/rpr.out b/src/test/regress/expected/rpr.out new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..5a0bffa9f2 --- /dev/null +++ b/src/test/regress/expected/rpr.out @@ -0,0 +1,821 @@ +-- +-- Test for row pattern definition clause +-- +CREATE TEMP TABLE stock ( + company TEXT, + tdate DATE, + price INTEGER +); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company1', '2023-07-01', 100); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company1', '2023-07-02', 200); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company1', '2023-07-03', 150); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company1', '2023-07-04', 140); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company1', '2023-07-05', 150); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company1', '2023-07-06', 90); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company1', '2023-07-07', 110); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company1', '2023-07-08', 130); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company1', '2023-07-09', 120); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company1', '2023-07-10', 130); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company2', '2023-07-01', 50); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company2', '2023-07-02', 2000); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company2', '2023-07-03', 1500); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company2', '2023-07-04', 1400); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company2', '2023-07-05', 1500); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company2', '2023-07-06', 60); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company2', '2023-07-07', 1100); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company2', '2023-07-08', 1300); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company2', '2023-07-09', 1200); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company2', '2023-07-10', 1300); +SELECT * FROM stock; + company | tdate | price +----------+------------+------- + company1 | 07-01-2023 | 100 + company1 | 07-02-2023 | 200 + company1 | 07-03-2023 | 150 + company1 | 07-04-2023 | 140 + company1 | 07-05-2023 | 150 + company1 | 07-06-2023 | 90 + company1 | 07-07-2023 | 110 + company1 | 07-08-2023 | 130 + company1 | 07-09-2023 | 120 + company1 | 07-10-2023 | 130 + company2 | 07-01-2023 | 50 + company2 | 07-02-2023 | 2000 + company2 | 07-03-2023 | 1500 + company2 | 07-04-2023 | 1400 + company2 | 07-05-2023 | 1500 + company2 | 07-06-2023 | 60 + company2 | 07-07-2023 | 1100 + company2 | 07-08-2023 | 1300 + company2 | 07-09-2023 | 1200 + company2 | 07-10-2023 | 1300 +(20 rows) + +-- basic test using PREV +SELECT company, tdate, price, first_value(price) OVER w, last_value(price) OVER w, + nth_value(tdate, 2) OVER w AS nth_second + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + INITIAL + PATTERN (START UP+ DOWN+) + DEFINE + START AS TRUE, + UP AS price > PREV(price), + DOWN AS price < PREV(price) +); + company | tdate | price | first_value | last_value | nth_second +----------+------------+-------+-------------+------------+------------ + company1 | 07-01-2023 | 100 | 100 | 140 | 07-02-2023 + company1 | 07-02-2023 | 200 | | | + company1 | 07-03-2023 | 150 | | | + company1 | 07-04-2023 | 140 | | | + company1 | 07-05-2023 | 150 | | | + company1 | 07-06-2023 | 90 | 90 | 120 | 07-07-2023 + company1 | 07-07-2023 | 110 | | | + company1 | 07-08-2023 | 130 | | | + company1 | 07-09-2023 | 120 | | | + company1 | 07-10-2023 | 130 | | | + company2 | 07-01-2023 | 50 | 50 | 1400 | 07-02-2023 + company2 | 07-02-2023 | 2000 | | | + company2 | 07-03-2023 | 1500 | | | + company2 | 07-04-2023 | 1400 | | | + company2 | 07-05-2023 | 1500 | | | + company2 | 07-06-2023 | 60 | 60 | 1200 | 07-07-2023 + company2 | 07-07-2023 | 1100 | | | + company2 | 07-08-2023 | 1300 | | | + company2 | 07-09-2023 | 1200 | | | + company2 | 07-10-2023 | 1300 | | | +(20 rows) + +-- basic test using PREV. UP appears twice +SELECT company, tdate, price, first_value(price) OVER w, last_value(price) OVER w, + nth_value(tdate, 2) OVER w AS nth_second + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + INITIAL + PATTERN (START UP+ DOWN+ UP+) + DEFINE + START AS TRUE, + UP AS price > PREV(price), + DOWN AS price < PREV(price) +); + company | tdate | price | first_value | last_value | nth_second +----------+------------+-------+-------------+------------+------------ + company1 | 07-01-2023 | 100 | 100 | 150 | 07-02-2023 + company1 | 07-02-2023 | 200 | | | + company1 | 07-03-2023 | 150 | | | + company1 | 07-04-2023 | 140 | | | + company1 | 07-05-2023 | 150 | | | + company1 | 07-06-2023 | 90 | 90 | 130 | 07-07-2023 + company1 | 07-07-2023 | 110 | | | + company1 | 07-08-2023 | 130 | | | + company1 | 07-09-2023 | 120 | | | + company1 | 07-10-2023 | 130 | | | + company2 | 07-01-2023 | 50 | 50 | 1500 | 07-02-2023 + company2 | 07-02-2023 | 2000 | | | + company2 | 07-03-2023 | 1500 | | | + company2 | 07-04-2023 | 1400 | | | + company2 | 07-05-2023 | 1500 | | | + company2 | 07-06-2023 | 60 | 60 | 1300 | 07-07-2023 + company2 | 07-07-2023 | 1100 | | | + company2 | 07-08-2023 | 1300 | | | + company2 | 07-09-2023 | 1200 | | | + company2 | 07-10-2023 | 1300 | | | +(20 rows) + +-- basic test using PREV. Use '*' +SELECT company, tdate, price, first_value(price) OVER w, last_value(price) OVER w, + nth_value(tdate, 2) OVER w AS nth_second + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + INITIAL + PATTERN (START UP* DOWN+) + DEFINE + START AS TRUE, + UP AS price > PREV(price), + DOWN AS price < PREV(price) +); + company | tdate | price | first_value | last_value | nth_second +----------+------------+-------+-------------+------------+------------ + company1 | 07-01-2023 | 100 | 100 | 140 | 07-02-2023 + company1 | 07-02-2023 | 200 | | | + company1 | 07-03-2023 | 150 | | | + company1 | 07-04-2023 | 140 | | | + company1 | 07-05-2023 | 150 | 150 | 90 | 07-06-2023 + company1 | 07-06-2023 | 90 | | | + company1 | 07-07-2023 | 110 | 110 | 120 | 07-08-2023 + company1 | 07-08-2023 | 130 | | | + company1 | 07-09-2023 | 120 | | | + company1 | 07-10-2023 | 130 | | | + company2 | 07-01-2023 | 50 | 50 | 1400 | 07-02-2023 + company2 | 07-02-2023 | 2000 | | | + company2 | 07-03-2023 | 1500 | | | + company2 | 07-04-2023 | 1400 | | | + company2 | 07-05-2023 | 1500 | 1500 | 60 | 07-06-2023 + company2 | 07-06-2023 | 60 | | | + company2 | 07-07-2023 | 1100 | 1100 | 1200 | 07-08-2023 + company2 | 07-08-2023 | 1300 | | | + company2 | 07-09-2023 | 1200 | | | + company2 | 07-10-2023 | 1300 | | | +(20 rows) + +-- basic test with none greedy pattern +SELECT company, tdate, price, count(*) OVER w + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + INITIAL + PATTERN (A A A) + DEFINE + A AS price >= 140 AND price <= 150 +); + company | tdate | price | count +----------+------------+-------+------- + company1 | 07-01-2023 | 100 | 0 + company1 | 07-02-2023 | 200 | 0 + company1 | 07-03-2023 | 150 | 3 + company1 | 07-04-2023 | 140 | 0 + company1 | 07-05-2023 | 150 | 0 + company1 | 07-06-2023 | 90 | 0 + company1 | 07-07-2023 | 110 | 0 + company1 | 07-08-2023 | 130 | 0 + company1 | 07-09-2023 | 120 | 0 + company1 | 07-10-2023 | 130 | 0 + company2 | 07-01-2023 | 50 | 0 + company2 | 07-02-2023 | 2000 | 0 + company2 | 07-03-2023 | 1500 | 0 + company2 | 07-04-2023 | 1400 | 0 + company2 | 07-05-2023 | 1500 | 0 + company2 | 07-06-2023 | 60 | 0 + company2 | 07-07-2023 | 1100 | 0 + company2 | 07-08-2023 | 1300 | 0 + company2 | 07-09-2023 | 1200 | 0 + company2 | 07-10-2023 | 1300 | 0 +(20 rows) + +-- last_value() should remain consistent +SELECT company, tdate, price, last_value(price) OVER w + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ORDER BY tdate + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + INITIAL + PATTERN (START UP+ DOWN+) + DEFINE + START AS TRUE, + UP AS price > PREV(price), + DOWN AS price < PREV(price) +); + company | tdate | price | last_value +----------+------------+-------+------------ + company1 | 07-01-2023 | 100 | 140 + company1 | 07-02-2023 | 200 | + company1 | 07-03-2023 | 150 | + company1 | 07-04-2023 | 140 | + company1 | 07-05-2023 | 150 | + company1 | 07-06-2023 | 90 | 120 + company1 | 07-07-2023 | 110 | + company1 | 07-08-2023 | 130 | + company1 | 07-09-2023 | 120 | + company1 | 07-10-2023 | 130 | + company2 | 07-01-2023 | 50 | 1400 + company2 | 07-02-2023 | 2000 | + company2 | 07-03-2023 | 1500 | + company2 | 07-04-2023 | 1400 | + company2 | 07-05-2023 | 1500 | + company2 | 07-06-2023 | 60 | 1200 + company2 | 07-07-2023 | 1100 | + company2 | 07-08-2023 | 1300 | + company2 | 07-09-2023 | 1200 | + company2 | 07-10-2023 | 1300 | +(20 rows) + +-- omit "START" in DEFINE but it is ok because "START AS TRUE" is +-- implicitly defined. per spec. +SELECT company, tdate, price, first_value(price) OVER w, last_value(price) OVER w, + nth_value(tdate, 2) OVER w AS nth_second + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + INITIAL + PATTERN (START UP+ DOWN+) + DEFINE + UP AS price > PREV(price), + DOWN AS price < PREV(price) +); + company | tdate | price | first_value | last_value | nth_second +----------+------------+-------+-------------+------------+------------ + company1 | 07-01-2023 | 100 | 100 | 140 | 07-02-2023 + company1 | 07-02-2023 | 200 | | | + company1 | 07-03-2023 | 150 | | | + company1 | 07-04-2023 | 140 | | | + company1 | 07-05-2023 | 150 | | | + company1 | 07-06-2023 | 90 | 90 | 120 | 07-07-2023 + company1 | 07-07-2023 | 110 | | | + company1 | 07-08-2023 | 130 | | | + company1 | 07-09-2023 | 120 | | | + company1 | 07-10-2023 | 130 | | | + company2 | 07-01-2023 | 50 | 50 | 1400 | 07-02-2023 + company2 | 07-02-2023 | 2000 | | | + company2 | 07-03-2023 | 1500 | | | + company2 | 07-04-2023 | 1400 | | | + company2 | 07-05-2023 | 1500 | | | + company2 | 07-06-2023 | 60 | 60 | 1200 | 07-07-2023 + company2 | 07-07-2023 | 1100 | | | + company2 | 07-08-2023 | 1300 | | | + company2 | 07-09-2023 | 1200 | | | + company2 | 07-10-2023 | 1300 | | | +(20 rows) + +-- the first row start with less than or equal to 100 +SELECT company, tdate, price, first_value(price) OVER w, last_value(price) OVER w + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + INITIAL + PATTERN (LOWPRICE UP+ DOWN+) + DEFINE + LOWPRICE AS price <= 100, + UP AS price > PREV(price), + DOWN AS price < PREV(price) +); + company | tdate | price | first_value | last_value +----------+------------+-------+-------------+------------ + company1 | 07-01-2023 | 100 | 100 | 140 + company1 | 07-02-2023 | 200 | | + company1 | 07-03-2023 | 150 | | + company1 | 07-04-2023 | 140 | | + company1 | 07-05-2023 | 150 | | + company1 | 07-06-2023 | 90 | 90 | 120 + company1 | 07-07-2023 | 110 | | + company1 | 07-08-2023 | 130 | | + company1 | 07-09-2023 | 120 | | + company1 | 07-10-2023 | 130 | | + company2 | 07-01-2023 | 50 | 50 | 1400 + company2 | 07-02-2023 | 2000 | | + company2 | 07-03-2023 | 1500 | | + company2 | 07-04-2023 | 1400 | | + company2 | 07-05-2023 | 1500 | | + company2 | 07-06-2023 | 60 | 60 | 1200 + company2 | 07-07-2023 | 1100 | | + company2 | 07-08-2023 | 1300 | | + company2 | 07-09-2023 | 1200 | | + company2 | 07-10-2023 | 1300 | | +(20 rows) + +-- second row raises 120% +SELECT company, tdate, price, first_value(price) OVER w, last_value(price) OVER w + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + INITIAL + PATTERN (LOWPRICE UP+ DOWN+) + DEFINE + LOWPRICE AS price <= 100, + UP AS price > PREV(price) * 1.2, + DOWN AS price < PREV(price) +); + company | tdate | price | first_value | last_value +----------+------------+-------+-------------+------------ + company1 | 07-01-2023 | 100 | 100 | 140 + company1 | 07-02-2023 | 200 | | + company1 | 07-03-2023 | 150 | | + company1 | 07-04-2023 | 140 | | + company1 | 07-05-2023 | 150 | | + company1 | 07-06-2023 | 90 | | + company1 | 07-07-2023 | 110 | | + company1 | 07-08-2023 | 130 | | + company1 | 07-09-2023 | 120 | | + company1 | 07-10-2023 | 130 | | + company2 | 07-01-2023 | 50 | 50 | 1400 + company2 | 07-02-2023 | 2000 | | + company2 | 07-03-2023 | 1500 | | + company2 | 07-04-2023 | 1400 | | + company2 | 07-05-2023 | 1500 | | + company2 | 07-06-2023 | 60 | | + company2 | 07-07-2023 | 1100 | | + company2 | 07-08-2023 | 1300 | | + company2 | 07-09-2023 | 1200 | | + company2 | 07-10-2023 | 1300 | | +(20 rows) + +-- using NEXT +SELECT company, tdate, price, first_value(price) OVER w, last_value(price) OVER w + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + INITIAL + PATTERN (START UPDOWN) + DEFINE + START AS TRUE, + UPDOWN AS price > PREV(price) AND price > NEXT(price) +); + company | tdate | price | first_value | last_value +----------+------------+-------+-------------+------------ + company1 | 07-01-2023 | 100 | 100 | 200 + company1 | 07-02-2023 | 200 | | + company1 | 07-03-2023 | 150 | | + company1 | 07-04-2023 | 140 | 140 | 150 + company1 | 07-05-2023 | 150 | | + company1 | 07-06-2023 | 90 | | + company1 | 07-07-2023 | 110 | 110 | 130 + company1 | 07-08-2023 | 130 | | + company1 | 07-09-2023 | 120 | | + company1 | 07-10-2023 | 130 | | + company2 | 07-01-2023 | 50 | 50 | 2000 + company2 | 07-02-2023 | 2000 | | + company2 | 07-03-2023 | 1500 | | + company2 | 07-04-2023 | 1400 | 1400 | 1500 + company2 | 07-05-2023 | 1500 | | + company2 | 07-06-2023 | 60 | | + company2 | 07-07-2023 | 1100 | 1100 | 1300 + company2 | 07-08-2023 | 1300 | | + company2 | 07-09-2023 | 1200 | | + company2 | 07-10-2023 | 1300 | | +(20 rows) + +-- using AFTER MATCH SKIP TO NEXT ROW +SELECT company, tdate, price, first_value(price) OVER w, last_value(price) OVER w + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + AFTER MATCH SKIP TO NEXT ROW + INITIAL + PATTERN (START UPDOWN) + DEFINE + START AS TRUE, + UPDOWN AS price > PREV(price) AND price > NEXT(price) +); + company | tdate | price | first_value | last_value +----------+------------+-------+-------------+------------ + company1 | 07-01-2023 | 100 | 100 | 200 + company1 | 07-02-2023 | 200 | | + company1 | 07-03-2023 | 150 | | + company1 | 07-04-2023 | 140 | 140 | 150 + company1 | 07-05-2023 | 150 | | + company1 | 07-06-2023 | 90 | | + company1 | 07-07-2023 | 110 | 110 | 130 + company1 | 07-08-2023 | 130 | | + company1 | 07-09-2023 | 120 | | + company1 | 07-10-2023 | 130 | | + company2 | 07-01-2023 | 50 | 50 | 2000 + company2 | 07-02-2023 | 2000 | | + company2 | 07-03-2023 | 1500 | | + company2 | 07-04-2023 | 1400 | 1400 | 1500 + company2 | 07-05-2023 | 1500 | | + company2 | 07-06-2023 | 60 | | + company2 | 07-07-2023 | 1100 | 1100 | 1300 + company2 | 07-08-2023 | 1300 | | + company2 | 07-09-2023 | 1200 | | + company2 | 07-10-2023 | 1300 | | +(20 rows) + +-- match everything +SELECT company, tdate, price, first_value(price) OVER w, last_value(price) OVER w + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ORDER BY tdate + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + AFTER MATCH SKIP PAST LAST ROW + INITIAL + PATTERN (A+) + DEFINE + A AS TRUE +); + company | tdate | price | first_value | last_value +----------+------------+-------+-------------+------------ + company1 | 07-01-2023 | 100 | 100 | 130 + company1 | 07-02-2023 | 200 | | + company1 | 07-03-2023 | 150 | | + company1 | 07-04-2023 | 140 | | + company1 | 07-05-2023 | 150 | | + company1 | 07-06-2023 | 90 | | + company1 | 07-07-2023 | 110 | | + company1 | 07-08-2023 | 130 | | + company1 | 07-09-2023 | 120 | | + company1 | 07-10-2023 | 130 | | + company2 | 07-01-2023 | 50 | 50 | 1300 + company2 | 07-02-2023 | 2000 | | + company2 | 07-03-2023 | 1500 | | + company2 | 07-04-2023 | 1400 | | + company2 | 07-05-2023 | 1500 | | + company2 | 07-06-2023 | 60 | | + company2 | 07-07-2023 | 1100 | | + company2 | 07-08-2023 | 1300 | | + company2 | 07-09-2023 | 1200 | | + company2 | 07-10-2023 | 1300 | | +(20 rows) + +-- backtracking with reclassification of rows +-- using AFTER MATCH SKIP PAST LAST ROW +SELECT company, tdate, price, first_value(tdate) OVER w, last_value(tdate) OVER w + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ORDER BY tdate + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + AFTER MATCH SKIP PAST LAST ROW + INITIAL + PATTERN (A+ B+) + DEFINE + A AS price > 100, + B AS price > 100 +); + company | tdate | price | first_value | last_value +----------+------------+-------+-------------+------------ + company1 | 07-01-2023 | 100 | | + company1 | 07-02-2023 | 200 | 07-02-2023 | 07-05-2023 + company1 | 07-03-2023 | 150 | | + company1 | 07-04-2023 | 140 | | + company1 | 07-05-2023 | 150 | | + company1 | 07-06-2023 | 90 | | + company1 | 07-07-2023 | 110 | 07-07-2023 | 07-10-2023 + company1 | 07-08-2023 | 130 | | + company1 | 07-09-2023 | 120 | | + company1 | 07-10-2023 | 130 | | + company2 | 07-01-2023 | 50 | | + company2 | 07-02-2023 | 2000 | 07-02-2023 | 07-05-2023 + company2 | 07-03-2023 | 1500 | | + company2 | 07-04-2023 | 1400 | | + company2 | 07-05-2023 | 1500 | | + company2 | 07-06-2023 | 60 | | + company2 | 07-07-2023 | 1100 | 07-07-2023 | 07-10-2023 + company2 | 07-08-2023 | 1300 | | + company2 | 07-09-2023 | 1200 | | + company2 | 07-10-2023 | 1300 | | +(20 rows) + +-- backtracking with reclassification of rows +-- using AFTER MATCH SKIP TO NEXT ROW +SELECT company, tdate, price, first_value(tdate) OVER w, last_value(tdate) OVER w + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ORDER BY tdate + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + AFTER MATCH SKIP TO NEXT ROW + INITIAL + PATTERN (A+ B+) + DEFINE + A AS price > 100, + B AS price > 100 +); + company | tdate | price | first_value | last_value +----------+------------+-------+-------------+------------ + company1 | 07-01-2023 | 100 | | + company1 | 07-02-2023 | 200 | 07-02-2023 | 07-05-2023 + company1 | 07-03-2023 | 150 | 07-03-2023 | 07-05-2023 + company1 | 07-04-2023 | 140 | 07-04-2023 | 07-05-2023 + company1 | 07-05-2023 | 150 | | + company1 | 07-06-2023 | 90 | | + company1 | 07-07-2023 | 110 | 07-07-2023 | 07-10-2023 + company1 | 07-08-2023 | 130 | 07-08-2023 | 07-10-2023 + company1 | 07-09-2023 | 120 | 07-09-2023 | 07-10-2023 + company1 | 07-10-2023 | 130 | | + company2 | 07-01-2023 | 50 | | + company2 | 07-02-2023 | 2000 | 07-02-2023 | 07-05-2023 + company2 | 07-03-2023 | 1500 | 07-03-2023 | 07-05-2023 + company2 | 07-04-2023 | 1400 | 07-04-2023 | 07-05-2023 + company2 | 07-05-2023 | 1500 | | + company2 | 07-06-2023 | 60 | | + company2 | 07-07-2023 | 1100 | 07-07-2023 | 07-10-2023 + company2 | 07-08-2023 | 1300 | 07-08-2023 | 07-10-2023 + company2 | 07-09-2023 | 1200 | 07-09-2023 | 07-10-2023 + company2 | 07-10-2023 | 1300 | | +(20 rows) + +-- ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND offset FOLLOWING +SELECT company, tdate, price, first_value(tdate) OVER w, last_value(tdate) OVER w, + count(*) OVER w + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ORDER BY tdate + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND 2 FOLLOWING + AFTER MATCH SKIP PAST LAST ROW + PATTERN (START UP+ DOWN+) + DEFINE + START AS TRUE, + UP AS price > PREV(price), + DOWN AS price < PREV(price) +); + company | tdate | price | first_value | last_value | count +----------+------------+-------+-------------+------------+------- + company1 | 07-01-2023 | 100 | 07-01-2023 | 07-03-2023 | 3 + company1 | 07-02-2023 | 200 | | | 0 + company1 | 07-03-2023 | 150 | | | 0 + company1 | 07-04-2023 | 140 | 07-04-2023 | 07-06-2023 | 3 + company1 | 07-05-2023 | 150 | | | 0 + company1 | 07-06-2023 | 90 | | | 0 + company1 | 07-07-2023 | 110 | 07-07-2023 | 07-09-2023 | 3 + company1 | 07-08-2023 | 130 | | | 0 + company1 | 07-09-2023 | 120 | | | 0 + company1 | 07-10-2023 | 130 | | | 0 + company2 | 07-01-2023 | 50 | 07-01-2023 | 07-03-2023 | 3 + company2 | 07-02-2023 | 2000 | | | 0 + company2 | 07-03-2023 | 1500 | | | 0 + company2 | 07-04-2023 | 1400 | 07-04-2023 | 07-06-2023 | 3 + company2 | 07-05-2023 | 1500 | | | 0 + company2 | 07-06-2023 | 60 | | | 0 + company2 | 07-07-2023 | 1100 | 07-07-2023 | 07-09-2023 | 3 + company2 | 07-08-2023 | 1300 | | | 0 + company2 | 07-09-2023 | 1200 | | | 0 + company2 | 07-10-2023 | 1300 | | | 0 +(20 rows) + +-- +-- Aggregates +-- +-- using AFTER MATCH SKIP PAST LAST ROW +SELECT company, tdate, price, + first_value(price) OVER w, + last_value(price) OVER w, + max(price) OVER w, + min(price) OVER w, + sum(price) OVER w, + avg(price) OVER w, + count(price) OVER w +FROM stock +WINDOW w AS ( +PARTITION BY company +ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING +AFTER MATCH SKIP PAST LAST ROW +INITIAL +PATTERN (START UP+ DOWN+) +DEFINE +START AS TRUE, +UP AS price > PREV(price), +DOWN AS price < PREV(price) +); + company | tdate | price | first_value | last_value | max | min | sum | avg | count +----------+------------+-------+-------------+------------+------+-----+------+-----------------------+------- + company1 | 07-01-2023 | 100 | 100 | 140 | 200 | 100 | 590 | 147.5000000000000000 | 4 + company1 | 07-02-2023 | 200 | | | | | | | 0 + company1 | 07-03-2023 | 150 | | | | | | | 0 + company1 | 07-04-2023 | 140 | | | | | | | 0 + company1 | 07-05-2023 | 150 | | | | | | | 0 + company1 | 07-06-2023 | 90 | 90 | 120 | 130 | 90 | 450 | 112.5000000000000000 | 4 + company1 | 07-07-2023 | 110 | | | | | | | 0 + company1 | 07-08-2023 | 130 | | | | | | | 0 + company1 | 07-09-2023 | 120 | | | | | | | 0 + company1 | 07-10-2023 | 130 | | | | | | | 0 + company2 | 07-01-2023 | 50 | 50 | 1400 | 2000 | 50 | 4950 | 1237.5000000000000000 | 4 + company2 | 07-02-2023 | 2000 | | | | | | | 0 + company2 | 07-03-2023 | 1500 | | | | | | | 0 + company2 | 07-04-2023 | 1400 | | | | | | | 0 + company2 | 07-05-2023 | 1500 | | | | | | | 0 + company2 | 07-06-2023 | 60 | 60 | 1200 | 1300 | 60 | 3660 | 915.0000000000000000 | 4 + company2 | 07-07-2023 | 1100 | | | | | | | 0 + company2 | 07-08-2023 | 1300 | | | | | | | 0 + company2 | 07-09-2023 | 1200 | | | | | | | 0 + company2 | 07-10-2023 | 1300 | | | | | | | 0 +(20 rows) + +-- using AFTER MATCH SKIP TO NEXT ROW +SELECT company, tdate, price, + first_value(price) OVER w, + last_value(price) OVER w, + max(price) OVER w, + min(price) OVER w, + sum(price) OVER w, + avg(price) OVER w, + count(price) OVER w +FROM stock +WINDOW w AS ( +PARTITION BY company +ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING +AFTER MATCH SKIP TO NEXT ROW +INITIAL +PATTERN (START UP+ DOWN+) +DEFINE +START AS TRUE, +UP AS price > PREV(price), +DOWN AS price < PREV(price) +); + company | tdate | price | first_value | last_value | max | min | sum | avg | count +----------+------------+-------+-------------+------------+------+------+------+-----------------------+------- + company1 | 07-01-2023 | 100 | 100 | 140 | 200 | 100 | 590 | 147.5000000000000000 | 4 + company1 | 07-02-2023 | 200 | | | | | | | 0 + company1 | 07-03-2023 | 150 | | | | | | | 0 + company1 | 07-04-2023 | 140 | 140 | 90 | 150 | 90 | 380 | 126.6666666666666667 | 3 + company1 | 07-05-2023 | 150 | | | | | | | 0 + company1 | 07-06-2023 | 90 | 90 | 120 | 130 | 90 | 450 | 112.5000000000000000 | 4 + company1 | 07-07-2023 | 110 | 110 | 120 | 130 | 110 | 360 | 120.0000000000000000 | 3 + company1 | 07-08-2023 | 130 | | | | | | | 0 + company1 | 07-09-2023 | 120 | | | | | | | 0 + company1 | 07-10-2023 | 130 | | | | | | | 0 + company2 | 07-01-2023 | 50 | 50 | 1400 | 2000 | 50 | 4950 | 1237.5000000000000000 | 4 + company2 | 07-02-2023 | 2000 | | | | | | | 0 + company2 | 07-03-2023 | 1500 | | | | | | | 0 + company2 | 07-04-2023 | 1400 | 1400 | 60 | 1500 | 60 | 2960 | 986.6666666666666667 | 3 + company2 | 07-05-2023 | 1500 | | | | | | | 0 + company2 | 07-06-2023 | 60 | 60 | 1200 | 1300 | 60 | 3660 | 915.0000000000000000 | 4 + company2 | 07-07-2023 | 1100 | 1100 | 1200 | 1300 | 1100 | 3600 | 1200.0000000000000000 | 3 + company2 | 07-08-2023 | 1300 | | | | | | | 0 + company2 | 07-09-2023 | 1200 | | | | | | | 0 + company2 | 07-10-2023 | 1300 | | | | | | | 0 +(20 rows) + +-- JOIN case +CREATE TEMP TABLE t1 (i int, v1 int); +CREATE TEMP TABLE t2 (j int, v2 int); +INSERT INTO t1 VALUES(1,10); +INSERT INTO t1 VALUES(1,11); +INSERT INTO t1 VALUES(1,12); +INSERT INTO t2 VALUES(2,10); +INSERT INTO t2 VALUES(2,11); +INSERT INTO t2 VALUES(2,12); +SELECT * FROM t1, t2 WHERE t1.v1 <= 11 AND t2.v2 <= 11; + i | v1 | j | v2 +---+----+---+---- + 1 | 10 | 2 | 10 + 1 | 10 | 2 | 11 + 1 | 11 | 2 | 10 + 1 | 11 | 2 | 11 +(4 rows) + +SELECT *, count(*) OVER w FROM t1, t2 +WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY t1.i + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + INITIAL + PATTERN (A) + DEFINE + A AS v1 <= 11 AND v2 <= 11 +); + i | v1 | j | v2 | count +---+----+---+----+------- + 1 | 10 | 2 | 10 | 1 + 1 | 10 | 2 | 11 | 1 + 1 | 10 | 2 | 12 | 0 + 1 | 11 | 2 | 10 | 1 + 1 | 11 | 2 | 11 | 1 + 1 | 11 | 2 | 12 | 0 + 1 | 12 | 2 | 10 | 0 + 1 | 12 | 2 | 11 | 0 + 1 | 12 | 2 | 12 | 0 +(9 rows) + +-- WITH case +WITH wstock AS ( + SELECT * FROM stock WHERE tdate < '2023-07-08' +) +SELECT tdate, price, +first_value(tdate) OVER w, +count(*) OVER w + FROM wstock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ORDER BY tdate + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + INITIAL + PATTERN (START UP+ DOWN+) + DEFINE + START AS TRUE, + UP AS price > PREV(price), + DOWN AS price < PREV(price) +); + tdate | price | first_value | count +------------+-------+-------------+------- + 07-01-2023 | 100 | 07-01-2023 | 4 + 07-02-2023 | 200 | | 0 + 07-03-2023 | 150 | | 0 + 07-04-2023 | 140 | | 0 + 07-05-2023 | 150 | | 0 + 07-06-2023 | 90 | | 0 + 07-07-2023 | 110 | | 0 + 07-01-2023 | 50 | 07-01-2023 | 4 + 07-02-2023 | 2000 | | 0 + 07-03-2023 | 1500 | | 0 + 07-04-2023 | 1400 | | 0 + 07-05-2023 | 1500 | | 0 + 07-06-2023 | 60 | | 0 + 07-07-2023 | 1100 | | 0 +(14 rows) + +-- +-- Error cases +-- +-- row pattern definition variable name must not appear more than once +SELECT company, tdate, price, first_value(price) OVER w, last_value(price) OVER w + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + ORDER BY tdate + INITIAL + PATTERN (START UP+ DOWN+) + DEFINE + START AS TRUE, + UP AS price > PREV(price), + DOWN AS price < PREV(price), + UP AS price > PREV(price) +); +ERROR: syntax error at or near "ORDER" +LINE 6: ORDER BY tdate + ^ +-- pattern variable name must appear in DEFINE +SELECT company, tdate, price, first_value(price) OVER w, last_value(price) OVER w + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ORDER BY tdate + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + INITIAL + PATTERN (START UP+ DOWN+ END) + DEFINE + START AS TRUE, + UP AS price > PREV(price), + DOWN AS price < PREV(price) +); +ERROR: syntax error at or near "END" +LINE 8: PATTERN (START UP+ DOWN+ END) + ^ +-- FRAME must start at current row when row patttern recognition is used +SELECT company, tdate, price, first_value(price) OVER w, last_value(price) OVER w + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ORDER BY tdate + ROWS BETWEEN UNBOUNDED PRECEDING AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + INITIAL + PATTERN (START UP+ DOWN+) + DEFINE + START AS TRUE, + UP AS price > PREV(price), + DOWN AS price < PREV(price) +); +ERROR: FRAME must start at current row when row patttern recognition is used +-- SEEK is not supported +SELECT company, tdate, price, first_value(price) OVER w, last_value(price) OVER w + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ORDER BY tdate + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + AFTER MATCH SKIP TO NEXT ROW + SEEK + PATTERN (START UP+ DOWN+) + DEFINE + START AS TRUE, + UP AS price > PREV(price), + DOWN AS price < PREV(price) +); +ERROR: SEEK is not supported +LINE 8: SEEK + ^ +HINT: Use INITIAL. diff --git a/src/test/regress/parallel_schedule b/src/test/regress/parallel_schedule index 675c567617..0ca2713c3d 100644 --- a/src/test/regress/parallel_schedule +++ b/src/test/regress/parallel_schedule @@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ test: publication subscription # Another group of parallel tests # select_views depends on create_view # ---------- -test: select_views portals_p2 foreign_key cluster dependency guc bitmapops combocid tsearch tsdicts foreign_data window xmlmap functional_deps advisory_lock indirect_toast equivclass +test: select_views portals_p2 foreign_key cluster dependency guc bitmapops combocid tsearch tsdicts foreign_data window xmlmap functional_deps advisory_lock indirect_toast equivclass rpr # ---------- # Another group of parallel tests (JSON related) diff --git a/src/test/regress/sql/rpr.sql b/src/test/regress/sql/rpr.sql new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..0a69cc0e11 --- /dev/null +++ b/src/test/regress/sql/rpr.sql @@ -0,0 +1,392 @@ +-- +-- Test for row pattern definition clause +-- + +CREATE TEMP TABLE stock ( + company TEXT, + tdate DATE, + price INTEGER +); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company1', '2023-07-01', 100); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company1', '2023-07-02', 200); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company1', '2023-07-03', 150); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company1', '2023-07-04', 140); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company1', '2023-07-05', 150); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company1', '2023-07-06', 90); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company1', '2023-07-07', 110); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company1', '2023-07-08', 130); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company1', '2023-07-09', 120); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company1', '2023-07-10', 130); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company2', '2023-07-01', 50); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company2', '2023-07-02', 2000); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company2', '2023-07-03', 1500); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company2', '2023-07-04', 1400); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company2', '2023-07-05', 1500); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company2', '2023-07-06', 60); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company2', '2023-07-07', 1100); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company2', '2023-07-08', 1300); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company2', '2023-07-09', 1200); +INSERT INTO stock VALUES ('company2', '2023-07-10', 1300); + +SELECT * FROM stock; + +-- basic test using PREV +SELECT company, tdate, price, first_value(price) OVER w, last_value(price) OVER w, + nth_value(tdate, 2) OVER w AS nth_second + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + INITIAL + PATTERN (START UP+ DOWN+) + DEFINE + START AS TRUE, + UP AS price > PREV(price), + DOWN AS price < PREV(price) +); + +-- basic test using PREV. UP appears twice +SELECT company, tdate, price, first_value(price) OVER w, last_value(price) OVER w, + nth_value(tdate, 2) OVER w AS nth_second + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + INITIAL + PATTERN (START UP+ DOWN+ UP+) + DEFINE + START AS TRUE, + UP AS price > PREV(price), + DOWN AS price < PREV(price) +); + +-- basic test using PREV. Use '*' +SELECT company, tdate, price, first_value(price) OVER w, last_value(price) OVER w, + nth_value(tdate, 2) OVER w AS nth_second + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + INITIAL + PATTERN (START UP* DOWN+) + DEFINE + START AS TRUE, + UP AS price > PREV(price), + DOWN AS price < PREV(price) +); + +-- basic test with none greedy pattern +SELECT company, tdate, price, count(*) OVER w + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + INITIAL + PATTERN (A A A) + DEFINE + A AS price >= 140 AND price <= 150 +); + +-- last_value() should remain consistent +SELECT company, tdate, price, last_value(price) OVER w + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ORDER BY tdate + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + INITIAL + PATTERN (START UP+ DOWN+) + DEFINE + START AS TRUE, + UP AS price > PREV(price), + DOWN AS price < PREV(price) +); + +-- omit "START" in DEFINE but it is ok because "START AS TRUE" is +-- implicitly defined. per spec. +SELECT company, tdate, price, first_value(price) OVER w, last_value(price) OVER w, + nth_value(tdate, 2) OVER w AS nth_second + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + INITIAL + PATTERN (START UP+ DOWN+) + DEFINE + UP AS price > PREV(price), + DOWN AS price < PREV(price) +); + +-- the first row start with less than or equal to 100 +SELECT company, tdate, price, first_value(price) OVER w, last_value(price) OVER w + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + INITIAL + PATTERN (LOWPRICE UP+ DOWN+) + DEFINE + LOWPRICE AS price <= 100, + UP AS price > PREV(price), + DOWN AS price < PREV(price) +); + +-- second row raises 120% +SELECT company, tdate, price, first_value(price) OVER w, last_value(price) OVER w + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + INITIAL + PATTERN (LOWPRICE UP+ DOWN+) + DEFINE + LOWPRICE AS price <= 100, + UP AS price > PREV(price) * 1.2, + DOWN AS price < PREV(price) +); + +-- using NEXT +SELECT company, tdate, price, first_value(price) OVER w, last_value(price) OVER w + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + INITIAL + PATTERN (START UPDOWN) + DEFINE + START AS TRUE, + UPDOWN AS price > PREV(price) AND price > NEXT(price) +); + +-- using AFTER MATCH SKIP TO NEXT ROW +SELECT company, tdate, price, first_value(price) OVER w, last_value(price) OVER w + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + AFTER MATCH SKIP TO NEXT ROW + INITIAL + PATTERN (START UPDOWN) + DEFINE + START AS TRUE, + UPDOWN AS price > PREV(price) AND price > NEXT(price) +); + +-- match everything + +SELECT company, tdate, price, first_value(price) OVER w, last_value(price) OVER w + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ORDER BY tdate + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + AFTER MATCH SKIP PAST LAST ROW + INITIAL + PATTERN (A+) + DEFINE + A AS TRUE +); + +-- backtracking with reclassification of rows +-- using AFTER MATCH SKIP PAST LAST ROW +SELECT company, tdate, price, first_value(tdate) OVER w, last_value(tdate) OVER w + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ORDER BY tdate + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + AFTER MATCH SKIP PAST LAST ROW + INITIAL + PATTERN (A+ B+) + DEFINE + A AS price > 100, + B AS price > 100 +); + +-- backtracking with reclassification of rows +-- using AFTER MATCH SKIP TO NEXT ROW +SELECT company, tdate, price, first_value(tdate) OVER w, last_value(tdate) OVER w + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ORDER BY tdate + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + AFTER MATCH SKIP TO NEXT ROW + INITIAL + PATTERN (A+ B+) + DEFINE + A AS price > 100, + B AS price > 100 +); + +-- ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND offset FOLLOWING +SELECT company, tdate, price, first_value(tdate) OVER w, last_value(tdate) OVER w, + count(*) OVER w + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ORDER BY tdate + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND 2 FOLLOWING + AFTER MATCH SKIP PAST LAST ROW + PATTERN (START UP+ DOWN+) + DEFINE + START AS TRUE, + UP AS price > PREV(price), + DOWN AS price < PREV(price) +); + +-- +-- Aggregates +-- + +-- using AFTER MATCH SKIP PAST LAST ROW +SELECT company, tdate, price, + first_value(price) OVER w, + last_value(price) OVER w, + max(price) OVER w, + min(price) OVER w, + sum(price) OVER w, + avg(price) OVER w, + count(price) OVER w +FROM stock +WINDOW w AS ( +PARTITION BY company +ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING +AFTER MATCH SKIP PAST LAST ROW +INITIAL +PATTERN (START UP+ DOWN+) +DEFINE +START AS TRUE, +UP AS price > PREV(price), +DOWN AS price < PREV(price) +); + +-- using AFTER MATCH SKIP TO NEXT ROW +SELECT company, tdate, price, + first_value(price) OVER w, + last_value(price) OVER w, + max(price) OVER w, + min(price) OVER w, + sum(price) OVER w, + avg(price) OVER w, + count(price) OVER w +FROM stock +WINDOW w AS ( +PARTITION BY company +ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING +AFTER MATCH SKIP TO NEXT ROW +INITIAL +PATTERN (START UP+ DOWN+) +DEFINE +START AS TRUE, +UP AS price > PREV(price), +DOWN AS price < PREV(price) +); + +-- JOIN case +CREATE TEMP TABLE t1 (i int, v1 int); +CREATE TEMP TABLE t2 (j int, v2 int); +INSERT INTO t1 VALUES(1,10); +INSERT INTO t1 VALUES(1,11); +INSERT INTO t1 VALUES(1,12); +INSERT INTO t2 VALUES(2,10); +INSERT INTO t2 VALUES(2,11); +INSERT INTO t2 VALUES(2,12); + +SELECT * FROM t1, t2 WHERE t1.v1 <= 11 AND t2.v2 <= 11; + +SELECT *, count(*) OVER w FROM t1, t2 +WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY t1.i + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + INITIAL + PATTERN (A) + DEFINE + A AS v1 <= 11 AND v2 <= 11 +); + +-- WITH case +WITH wstock AS ( + SELECT * FROM stock WHERE tdate < '2023-07-08' +) +SELECT tdate, price, +first_value(tdate) OVER w, +count(*) OVER w + FROM wstock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ORDER BY tdate + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + INITIAL + PATTERN (START UP+ DOWN+) + DEFINE + START AS TRUE, + UP AS price > PREV(price), + DOWN AS price < PREV(price) +); + +-- +-- Error cases +-- + +-- row pattern definition variable name must not appear more than once +SELECT company, tdate, price, first_value(price) OVER w, last_value(price) OVER w + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + ORDER BY tdate + INITIAL + PATTERN (START UP+ DOWN+) + DEFINE + START AS TRUE, + UP AS price > PREV(price), + DOWN AS price < PREV(price), + UP AS price > PREV(price) +); + +-- pattern variable name must appear in DEFINE +SELECT company, tdate, price, first_value(price) OVER w, last_value(price) OVER w + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ORDER BY tdate + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + INITIAL + PATTERN (START UP+ DOWN+ END) + DEFINE + START AS TRUE, + UP AS price > PREV(price), + DOWN AS price < PREV(price) +); + +-- FRAME must start at current row when row patttern recognition is used +SELECT company, tdate, price, first_value(price) OVER w, last_value(price) OVER w + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ORDER BY tdate + ROWS BETWEEN UNBOUNDED PRECEDING AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + INITIAL + PATTERN (START UP+ DOWN+) + DEFINE + START AS TRUE, + UP AS price > PREV(price), + DOWN AS price < PREV(price) +); + +-- SEEK is not supported +SELECT company, tdate, price, first_value(price) OVER w, last_value(price) OVER w + FROM stock + WINDOW w AS ( + PARTITION BY company + ORDER BY tdate + ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING + AFTER MATCH SKIP TO NEXT ROW + SEEK + PATTERN (START UP+ DOWN+) + DEFINE + START AS TRUE, + UP AS price > PREV(price), + DOWN AS price < PREV(price) +); -- 2.25.1 ----Next_Part(Sun_Apr_28_20_28_26_2024_444)-- Content-Type: Text/X-Patch; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="v17-0008-Allow-to-print-raw-parse-tree.patch" ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0); ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false); /* -- 2.52.0 --=-=-=-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 329+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns. @ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 329+ messages in thread From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are changed by the UPDATE. So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the 'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are not appropriate. Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might add too much overhead. This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus 'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index, however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them. --- src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ #include "libpq/pqmq.h" #include "miscadmin.h" #include "optimizer/optimizer.h" +#include "parser/parse_relation.h" #include "pgstat.h" #include "replication/logicalrelation.h" #include "storage/bufmgr.h" @@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt, Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id) { + Bitmapset *updatedCols = NULL; + RangeTblEntry *rte; + List *perminfos = NIL; + RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo; + chgcxt->cc_rel = relation; /* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */ chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState(); + /* + * Initialize updatedCols. + * + * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the + * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do + * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated. + * + * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when + * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we + * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()? + */ + for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++) + updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols, + i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); + + /* + * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but + * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand. + */ + rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry); + rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION; + rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation); + rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind; + /* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */ + addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte); + /* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */ + perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte); + perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols; + + ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos, + bms_make_singleton(1)); + chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo); - InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0); + InitResultRelInfo(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 -- 2024-04-28 11:00 [PATCH v17 7/8] Row pattern recognition patch (tests). Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@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