| From: | Andrei Lepikhov <a(dot)lepikhov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alena Rybakina <a(dot)rybakina(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, "Finnerty, Jim" <jfinnert(at)amazon(dot)com>, Marcos Pegoraro <marcos(at)f10(dot)com(dot)br>, teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru, Ranier Vilela <ranier(dot)vf(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: POC, WIP: OR-clause support for indexes |
| Date: | 2023-11-30 08:30:28 |
| Message-ID: | 8ff70ada-4ec7-436a-8bf8-d1c7d8551ff1@postgrespro.ru |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 30/11/2023 15:00, Alena Rybakina wrote:
> 2. The second patch is my patch version when I moved the OR
> transformation in the s index formation stage:
>
> So, I got the best query plan despite the possible OR to ANY
> transformation:
If the user uses a clause like "x IN (1,2) AND y=100", it will break
your 'good' solution.
In my opinion, the general approach here is to stay with OR->ANY
transformation at the parsing stage and invent one more way for picking
an index by looking into the array and attempting to find a compound index.
Having a shorter list of expressions, where uniform ORs are grouped into
arrays, the optimizer will do such work with less overhead.
--
regards,
Andrei Lepikhov
Postgres Professional
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) | 2023-11-30 08:42:27 | RE: [Proposal] global sequence implemented by snowflake ID |
| Previous Message | Pavel Borisov | 2023-11-30 08:29:46 | Re: XID formatting and SLRU refactorings (was: Add 64-bit XIDs into PostgreSQL 15) |