From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: index-only scans |
Date: | 2011-10-11 04:19:55 |
Message-ID: | 21434.1318306795@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I wrote:
> I have mostly-working code for approach #3, but I haven't tried to make
> EXPLAIN work yet. While looking at that I realized that there's a
> pretty good argument for adding the above-mentioned explicit TargetEntry
> list representing the index columns to index-only plan nodes. Namely,
> that if we don't do it, EXPLAIN will have to go to the catalogs to find
> out what's in that index, and this will fall down for "hypothetical"
> indexes injected into the planner by index advisors. We could imagine
> adding some more hooks to let the advisor inject bogus catalog data at
> EXPLAIN time, but on the whole it seems easier and less fragile to just
> have the planner include a data structure it has to build anyway into
> the finished plan.
> The need for this additional node list field also sways me in a
> direction that I'd previously been on the fence about, namely that
> I think index-only scans need to be their own independent plan node type
> instead of sharing a node type with regular indexscans. It's just too
> weird that a simple boolean indexonly property would mean completely
> different contents/interpretation of the tlist and quals.
Attached is a draft patch for this. It needs some more review before
committing, but it does pass regression tests now.
One point worth commenting on is that I chose to rename the OUTER and
INNER symbols for special varnos to OUTER_VAR and INNER_VAR, along with
adding a new special varno INDEX_VAR. It's bothered me for some time
that those macro names were way too generic/susceptible to collision;
and since I had to look at all the uses anyway to see if the INDEX case
needed to be added, this seemed like a good time to rename them.
regards, tom lane
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
index-only-scan-revisions.patch.gz | application/octet-stream | 29.9 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Stark | 2011-10-11 04:45:54 | Re: COUNT(*) and index-only scans |
Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2011-10-11 03:47:45 | Re: Dumping roles improvements? |