Re: [HACKERS] Surjective functional indexes

From: Konstantin Knizhnik <k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, 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: 2018-01-10 09:54:45
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 07.01.2018 01:59, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Greetings,
> * Konstantin Knizhnik (k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru) wrote:
>> On 15.12.2017 01:21, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>> On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 6:15 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:
>>>> Konstantin Knizhnik wrote:
>>>>> If you still thing that additional 16 bytes per relation in statistic is too
>>>>> high overhead, then I will also remove autotune.
>>>> I think it's pretty clear that these additional bytes are excessive.
>>> The bar to add new fields in PgStat_TableCounts in very high, and one
>>> attempt to tackle its scaling problems with many relations is here by
>>> Horiguchi-san:
>>> His patch may be worth a look if you need more fields for your
>>> feature. So it seems to me that the patch as currently presented has
>>> close to zero chance to be committed as long as you keep your changes
>>> to pgstat.c.
>> Ok, looks like everybody think that autotune based on statistic is bad idea.
>> Attached please find patch without autotune.
> This patch appears to apply with a reasonable amount of fuzz, builds,
> and passes 'make check', at least, therefore I'm going to mark it
> 'Needs Review'.
> I will note that the documentation doesn't currently build due to this:
> /home/sfrost/git/pg/dev/cleanup/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_index.sgml:302: parser error : Opening and ending tag mismatch: literal line 302 and unparseable
> <term><literal>recheck_on_update</></term>
> but I don't think it makes sense for that to stand in the way of someone
> doing a review of the base patch. Still, please do fix the
> documentation build when you get a chance.
> Thanks!
> Stephen
Sorry, issue with documentation is fixed.

Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional:
The Russian Postgres Company

Attachment Content-Type Size
projection-7.patch text/x-patch 27.0 KB

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Fabien COELHO 2018-01-10 10:00:24 Re: Re: [HACKERS] pgbench randomness initialization
Previous Message Konstantin Knizhnik 2018-01-10 09:34:32 Re: AS OF queries