From: | Emre Hasegeli <emre(at)hasegeli(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: improve transparency of bitmap-only heap scans |
Date: | 2019-06-20 14:55:36 |
Message-ID: | 20190620145536.GA32518@kisb.local |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> Looking at the discussion where the feature was added, I think changing the
> EXPLAIN just wasn't considered.
I think this is an oversight. It is very useful to have this on
EXPLAIN.
> The attached patch adds "avoided" to "exact" and "lossy" as a category
> under "Heap Blocks".
It took me a while to figure out what those names mean. "unfetched",
as you call it on the code, may be more descriptive than "avoided" for
the new label. However I think the other two are more confusing. It
may be a good idea to change them together with this.
> I think the name of the node should also be changed to "Bitmap Only Heap
> Scan", but I didn't implement that as adding another NodeTag looks like a
> lot of tedious error prone work to do before getting feedback on whether
> the change is desirable in the first place, or the correct approach.
I am not sure about this part. In my opinion it may have been easier
to explain to users if "Index Only Scan" had not been separate but
"Index Scan" optimization.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2019-06-20 14:57:04 | Re: POC: Cleaning up orphaned files using undo logs |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2019-06-20 14:52:54 | Re: benchmarking Flex practices |