| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Konstantin Knizhnik <k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Surjective functional indexes |
| Date: | 2018-03-22 20:53:53 |
| Message-ID: | 20180322205353.5v6g5zu3owzh43qp@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
The whole IsProjectionFunctionalIndex looks kinda bogus/ugly to me. Set
the boolean to false, but keep evaluating anyway? But then, I thought
the idea was to do this based on the reloption, not by comparing the
expression cost to a magical (unmodifiable) value?
In RelationGetIndexAttrBitmap(), indexattrs no longer gets the columns
corresponding to projection indexes. Isn't that weird/error
prone/confusing? I think it'd be saner to add these bits to both
bitmaps.
Please update the comments ending in heapam.c:4188, and generally all
comments that you should update.
Please keep serial_schedule in sync with parallel_schedule.
Also, pgindent.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeremy Finzel | 2018-03-22 21:24:13 | Re: found xmin from before relfrozenxid on pg_catalog.pg_authid |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2018-03-22 20:37:43 | Re: [HACKERS] Surjective functional indexes |