Re: Indirect indexes

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Indirect indexes
Date: 2016-12-24 02:31:30
Message-ID: 20161224023130.mis6hcow6d3xly4i@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Alvaro Herrera wrote:

> There are a few broken things yet, such as "REINDEX TABLE pg_class" and
> some other operations specifically on pg_class. This one in particular
> breaks the regression tests, but that shouldn't be terribly difficult to
> fix.

This version fixes this problem, so the regression tests now pass.
I fixed it by adding yet another index attribute bitmapset to
RelationData, so we keep track of "all indexed columns" separately from
"columns used by regular indexes" and "columns used by indirect
indexes". A possible optimization is to remove the first list and just
keep "indirect" and "direct", and in the only case where we need all of
them, do a bms_union -- it's not performance-critical anyway.

--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

Attachment Content-Type Size
indirect-indexes-2.patch text/plain 97.7 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joel Jacobson 2016-12-24 02:56:08 Re: pg_stat_activity.waiting_start
Previous Message Tom Lane 2016-12-24 02:16:13 Re: pg_stat_activity.waiting_start