agora inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

[PATCH v53 5/7] Check for transaction block early in ExecRepack
220+ messages / 2 participants
[nested] [flat]

* [PATCH v53 5/7] Check for transaction block early in ExecRepack
@ 2026-04-03 15:23 Srinath Reddy Sadipiralla <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Srinath Reddy Sadipiralla @ 2026-04-03 15:23 UTC (permalink / raw)

Currently, executing REPACK (CONCURRENTLY) without a table name inside a
transaction block throws the error "REPACK CONCURRENTLY requires explicit
table name" instead of the expected transaction block error. This occurs
because ExecRepack() validates the parsed options and missing relation
before verifying the transaction state.

This behavior is inconsistent with other utility commands like VACUUM
,REINDEX, etc; which invoke PreventInTransactionBlock() at the very start
of their execution to properly reject execution inside user transactions
before validating targets.

Add PreventInTransactionBlock to the top of ExecRepack() to enforce the
transaction block restriction early. This prevents the user from fixing
a missing table error only to immediately hit a transaction block error,
and also ensures consistency with rest of the commands.

Author: Srinath Reddy Sadipiralla <[email protected]>
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 27 +++++++++++++++------------
 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index f2759cdbef1..8d9b2b2e370 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -279,6 +279,21 @@ ExecRepack(ParseState *pstate, RepackStmt *stmt, bool isTopLevel)
 	/* Determine the lock mode to use. */
 	lockmode = RepackLockLevel((params.options & CLUOPT_CONCURRENT) != 0);
 
+	if ((params.options & CLUOPT_CONCURRENT) != 0)
+	{
+		/*
+		 * Make sure we're not in a transaction block.
+		 *
+		 * The reason is that repack_setup_logical_decoding() could wait
+		 * indefinitely for our XID to complete. (The deadlock detector would
+		 * not recognize it because we'd be waiting for ourselves, i.e. no
+		 * real lock conflict.) It would be possible to run in a transaction
+		 * block if we had no XID, but this restriction is simpler for users
+		 * to understand and we don't lose any functionality.
+		 */
+		PreventInTransactionBlock(isTopLevel, "REPACK (CONCURRENTLY)");
+	}
+
 	/*
 	 * If a single relation is specified, process it and we're done ... unless
 	 * the relation is a partitioned table, in which case we fall through.
@@ -511,19 +526,7 @@ cluster_rel(RepackCommand cmd, Relation OldHeap, Oid indexOid,
 	 * replica index OID.
 	 */
 	if (concurrent)
-	{
-		/*
-		 * Make sure we're not in a transaction block.
-		 *
-		 * The reason is that repack_setup_logical_decoding() could deadlock
-		 * if there's an XID already assigned.  It would be possible to run in
-		 * a transaction block if we had no XID, but this restriction is
-		 * simpler for users to understand and we don't lose anything.
-		 */
-		PreventInTransactionBlock(isTopLevel, "REPACK (CONCURRENTLY)");
-
 		check_repack_concurrently_requirements(OldHeap, &ident_idx);
-	}
 
 	/* Check for user-requested abort. */
 	CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS();
-- 
2.47.3


--qr3jlalmmcpkiodg
Content-Type: text/x-diff; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename="v53-0006-Error-out-any-process-that-would-block-at-REPACK.patch"



^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/2] Provide the executor with information on updated columns.
@ 2026-07-01 13:18 Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 220+ messages in thread

From: Antonin Houska @ 2026-07-01 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)

When replaying data changes, REPACK calls ExecInsertIndexTuples() for each
INSERT and UPDATE. In the latter case, the function needs to determine the
value of the 'indexUnchanged' hint for the index AM. (The hint is always false
for INSERT.) Therefore, REPACK is supposed to specify which columns are
changed by the UPDATE.

So far, REPACK missed to specify the set of updated columns, so the
'indexUnchanged' hint could incorrectly evaluate to true. Although it should
not affect correctness, it can make the index AM use optimizations that are
not appropriate.  Ideally, we should compute the set of updated columns for
each individual UPDATE, however the comparison of the old and new tuple might
add too much overhead.

This patch initializes the set as if all columns were updated. Thus
'indexUnchanged' always evaluates to false. This way the index AM never uses
the related optimizations. It might result in worse structure of the index,
however it seems better to not use the optimizations than to misuse them.
---
 src/backend/commands/repack.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/repack.c b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
index c9b0c047477..f37bb9a21af 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/repack.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/repack.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
 #include "libpq/pqmq.h"
 #include "miscadmin.h"
 #include "optimizer/optimizer.h"
+#include "parser/parse_relation.h"
 #include "pgstat.h"
 #include "replication/logicalrelation.h"
 #include "storage/bufmgr.h"
@@ -3005,13 +3006,50 @@ static void
 initialize_change_context(ChangeContext *chgcxt,
 						  Relation relation, Oid ident_index_id)
 {
+	Bitmapset	*updatedCols = NULL;
+	RangeTblEntry *rte;
+	List	   *perminfos = NIL;
+	RTEPermissionInfo *perminfo;
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rel = relation;
 
 	/* Only initialize fields needed by ExecInsertIndexTuples(). */
 	chgcxt->cc_estate = CreateExecutorState();
 
+	/*
+	 * Initialize updatedCols.
+	 *
+	 * The point is that ExecInsertIndexTuples() should not pass the
+	 * indexUnchanged hint to the index AM unless there's a reason to do
+	 * so. For simplicity, we consider all columns updated.
+	 *
+	 * XXX Should we spend more effort to compare the old and new tuple when
+	 * replaying UPDATE, or at least exclude unchanged TOAST values, like we
+	 * do in logicalrep_write_tuple()?
+	 */
+	for (int i = 0; i < RelationGetDescr(relation)->natts; i++)
+		updatedCols = bms_add_member(updatedCols,
+									 i + 1 - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber);
+
+	/*
+	 * In this case, RTE only needs to have ->perminfoindex initialized, but
+	 * there's no reason to not set the fields whose values we have at hand.
+	 */
+	rte = makeNode(RangeTblEntry);
+	rte->rtekind = RTE_RELATION;
+	rte->relid = RelationGetRelid(relation);
+	rte->relkind = RelationGetForm(relation)->relkind;
+	/* Create the RTEPermissionInfo instance (and set ->perminfoindex). */
+	addRTEPermissionInfo(&perminfos, rte);
+	/* Make updatedCols available to the executor functions. */
+	perminfo = getRTEPermissionInfo(perminfos, rte);
+	perminfo->updatedCols = updatedCols;
+
+	ExecInitRangeTable(chgcxt->cc_estate, list_make1(rte), perminfos,
+					   bms_make_singleton(1));
+
 	chgcxt->cc_rri = makeNode(ResultRelInfo);
-	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 0, NULL, 0);
+	InitResultRelInfo(chgcxt->cc_rri, relation, 1, NULL, 0);
 	ExecOpenIndices(chgcxt->cc_rri, false);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.52.0


--=-=-=--





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 220+ messages in thread