From: | James Coleman <jtc331(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Floris Van Nee <florisvannee(at)optiver(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Jesper Pedersen <jesper(dot)pedersen(at)redhat(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Rafia Sabih <rafia(dot)pghackers(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bhushan Uparkar <bhushan(dot)uparkar(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
Subject: | Re: Index Skip Scan |
Date: | 2020-03-09 20:31:40 |
Message-ID: | CAAaqYe9ELb1rKx06fuKom7aBLCoZ0-mB9FkojijXnucoV95WQQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 9, 2020 at 3:56 PM Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Assuming we'll implement it in a way that we do not know about what kind
> of path type is that in create_distinct_path, then it can also work for
> ProjectionPath or anything else (if UniqueKeys are present). But then
> still EquivalenceMember are used only to figure out correct
> distinctPrefixKeys and do not affect whether or not skipping is applied.
> What do I miss?
Part of the puzzle seems to me to this part of the response:
> I think the UniqueKeys may need to be changed from using
> EquivalenceClasses to use Exprs instead.
But I can't say I'm being overly helpful by pointing that out, since I
don't have my head in the code enough to understand how you'd
accomplish that :)
James
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | do w.r. (wrd1e16) | 2020-03-09 20:35:10 | GSOC 2020 - Develop Performance Farm Benchmarks and Website (2020) |
Previous Message | David Rowley | 2020-03-09 20:29:32 | Re: Index Skip Scan |