Re: GIN improvements part2: fast scan

On 14.11.2013 19:26, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 3:00 PM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com
>> wrote:
>
>> On 28.06.2013 22:31, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
>>
>>> Now, I got the point of three state consistent: we can keep only one
>>> consistent in opclasses that support new interface. exact true and exact
>>> false values will be passed in the case of current patch consistent; exact
>>> false and unknown will be passed in the case of current patch
>>> preConsistent. That's reasonable.
>>>
>>
>> I'm going to mark this as "returned with feedback". For the next version,
>> I'd like to see the API changed per above. Also, I'd like us to do
>> something about the tidbitmap overhead, as a separate patch before this, so
>> that we can assess the actual benefit of this patch. And a new test case
>> that demonstrates the I/O benefits.
>
>
> Revised version of patch is attached.
> Changes are so:
> 1) Patch rebased against packed posting lists, not depends on additional
> information now.
> 2) New API with tri-state logic is introduced.

Thanks! A couple of thoughts after a 5-minute glance:

* documentation

* How about defining the tri-state consistent function to also return a
tri-state? True would mean that the tuple definitely matches, false
means the tuple definitely does not match, and Unknown means it might
match. Or does return value true with recheck==true have the same
effect? If I understood the patch, right, returning Unknown or True
wouldn't actually make any difference, but it's conceivable that we
might come up with more optimizations in the future that could take
advantage of that. For example, for a query like "foo OR (bar AND baz)",
you could immediately return any tuples that match foo, and not bother
scanning for bar and baz at all.

- Heikki