Re: Some ExecSeqScan optimizations

From: Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Vladlen Popolitov <v(dot)popolitov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Junwang Zhao <zhjwpku(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Some ExecSeqScan optimizations
Date: 2025-01-10 11:22:41
Message-ID: CA+HiwqH=rYo1dm4096b5ZPL_2mGpH-S9wXfYkg7FAGCc5f3mQg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 7:36 PM David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Jan 2025 at 22:53, Vladlen Popolitov
> <v(dot)popolitov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
> > In case of query
> > select count(*) from test_table where a_1 = 1000000;
> > I would expect increase of query time due to additional if...else . It
> > is not clear
> > what code was eliminated to decrease query time.
>
> Are you talking about the code added to ExecInitSeqScan() to determine
> which node function to call? If so, that's only called during executor
> startup. The idea here is to reduce the branching during execution by
> calling one of those special functions which has a more specialised
> version of the ExecScan code for the particular purpose it's going to
> be used for.

Looks like I hadn't mentioned this key aspect of the patch in the
commit message, so did that in the attached.

Vladlen, does what David wrote and the new commit message answer your
question(s)?

--
Thanks, Amit Langote

Attachment Content-Type Size
v4-0001-Refactor-ExecScan-to-inline-scan-filtering-and-pr.patch application/octet-stream 20.2 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dean Rasheed 2025-01-10 11:31:39 Re: psql: Add leakproof field to \dAo+ meta-command results
Previous Message Chiranmoy.Bhattacharya@fujitsu.com 2025-01-10 11:19:42 Re: [PATCH] SVE popcount support