Re: SQL Property Graph Queries (SQL/PGQ)

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>
To: Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>, assam258(at)gmail(dot)com
Cc: Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, Junwang Zhao <zhjwpku(at)gmail(dot)com>, Vik Fearing <vik(at)postgresfriends(dot)org>, Ajay Pal <ajay(dot)pal(dot)k(at)gmail(dot)com>, Imran Zaheer <imran(dot)zhir(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: SQL Property Graph Queries (SQL/PGQ)
Date: 2026-01-13 10:17:30
Message-ID: 4db5f51d-d76d-4381-9d3e-26d9b824f33f@eisentraut.org
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 02.01.26 09:48, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
>> #1 [Code] src/backend/commands/propgraphcmds.c:1632
>> FIXME: Missing index for plppropid column causes sequential scan.
>> Decision needed: (a) add index, or (c) allow seq scan for rare path.
>
> The path is rare enough that I think we can allow the seq scan. Given
> that Peter has marked it as FIXME, it seems we will keep it as is for
> now, but will revisit if performance becomes an issue. Peter, please
> correct me if I'm wrong.

Yeah, doesn't seem critical. Maybe "downgrade" to "XXX".

>> #5 [Doc] doc/src/sgml/queries.sgml:2929,2931
>> TODO comments for unimplemented features without clear limitation notes.
>
> Those TODOs are not visible to users. I think they serve as
> placeholders to add the documentation when the features are
> implemented. We may want to remove them, but I see no harm in keeping
> them for now. Peter, what do you think?

We should keep them and fill them in. :)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2026-01-13 10:23:25 Re: SQL Property Graph Queries (SQL/PGQ)
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2026-01-13 10:12:08 Re: SQL Property Graph Queries (SQL/PGQ)