Re: [WIP PATCH] Index scan offset optimisation using visibility map

From: Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>
To: Michail Nikolaev <michail(dot)nikolaev(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [WIP PATCH] Index scan offset optimisation using visibility map
Date: 2018-03-02 05:58:43
Message-ID: 8C1D07DD-3D97-4466-B2BE-5EE6B563ECE5@yandex-team.ru
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi, Michail!

Here are points that we need to address before advancing the patch.

> 20 февр. 2018 г., в 11:45, Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru> написал(а):
>
> Minor spots:
> There are some trailing whitespaces at line ends
>> Offset cannot be optimized because parallel execution
> I'd replace with
>> Offset cannot be optimized [in spite of | due to] parallel execution
>

> From my point of view, you should add to patch some words here
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/indexes-index-only-scans.html

And few thoughts about plan cost estimation. Plz check create_limit_path() logic on cost estimation. I don't think you have enough information there to guess about possibility of IoS offset computation.
> I do not know if it is possible to take into account this optimization in cost estimation.
> Does Limit node take cost of scanning into startup cost?

I'm marking patch as WoA, plz ping it to Need Review when done.

Thanks!

Best regards, Andrey Borodin.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2018-03-02 06:08:06 Re: Rewriting the test of pg_upgrade as a TAP test - take two
Previous Message Andrey Borodin 2018-03-02 05:33:40 Re: New gist vacuum.