From: | Ranier Vilela <ranier(dot)vf(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Alena Rybakina <lena(dot)ribackina(at)yandex(dot)ru> |
Cc: | Andrey Lepikhov <a(dot)lepikhov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Marcos Pegoraro <marcos(at)f10(dot)com(dot)br>, teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
Subject: | Re: POC, WIP: OR-clause support for indexes |
Date: | 2023-07-11 13:29:14 |
Message-ID: | CAEudQApTqCP2+Kso7=V49hNysmbMhnWCVEXPtvE-dDUssH6-uQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Em ter., 11 de jul. de 2023 às 09:29, Alena Rybakina <
lena(dot)ribackina(at)yandex(dot)ru> escreveu:
> Hi!
> On 10.07.2023 15:15, Ranier Vilela wrote:
>
> Em seg., 10 de jul. de 2023 às 09:03, Ranier Vilela <ranier(dot)vf(at)gmail(dot)com>
> escreveu:
>
>> Hi Alena,
>>
>> Em seg., 10 de jul. de 2023 às 05:38, Alena Rybakina <
>> lena(dot)ribackina(at)yandex(dot)ru> escreveu:
>>
>>> I agreed with the changes. Thank you for your work.
>>>
>>> I updated patch and added you to the authors.
>>>
>>> I specified Ranier Vilela as a reviewer.
>>>
>> Is a good habit when post a new version of the patch, name it v1, v2,
>> v3,etc.
>> Makes it easy to follow development and references on the thread.
>>
>> Sorry, I fixed it.
>
> Regarding the last patch.
>> 1. I think that variable const_is_left is not necessary.
>> You can stick with:
>> + if (IsA(get_leftop(orqual), Const))
>> + nconst_expr =get_rightop(orqual);
>> + const_expr = get_leftop(orqual) ;
>> + else if (IsA(get_rightop(orqual), Const))
>> + nconst_expr =get_leftop(orqual);
>> + const_expr = get_rightop(orqual) ;
>> + else
>> + {
>> + or_list = lappend(or_list, orqual);
>> + continue;
>> + }
>>
> Agreed.
>
You missed in removing the declaration
- bool const_is_left = true;
.
>
>> 2. Test scalar_type != RECORDOID is more cheaper,
>> mainly if OidIsValid were a function, we knows that is a macro.
>> + if (scalar_type != RECORDOID && OidIsValid(scalar_type))
>>
>> Is it safe? Maybe we should first make sure that it can be checked on
> RECORDOID at all?
>
Yes it's safe, because && connector.
But you can leave as is in v5.
best regards,
Ranier Vilela
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Matthias van de Meent | 2023-07-11 13:44:39 | Re: [PATCH]Add a tip to the check mode |
Previous Message | Palak Chaturvedi | 2023-07-11 13:09:36 | Re: Extension Enhancement: Buffer Invalidation in pg_buffercache |