| From: | "Greg Burd" <greg(at)burd(dot)me> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David Rowley" <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Chao Li" <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com>, "PostgreSQL Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Add bms_offset_members() function for bitshifting Bitmapsets |
| Date: | 2026-04-19 19:21:41 |
| Message-ID: | 77f5109f-6d39-4cf1-8d0d-f826435d6cb6@app.fastmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Apr 18, 2026, at 3:49 AM, David Rowley wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Apr 2026 at 14:33, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 15 Apr 2026 at 14:30, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> >
>> > David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> > > I'd not considered surprise-prone as an aspect. I understand we have
>> > > bms_join and bms_union, which do the same thing if you only care about
>> > > the value of the result and not what happens to the inputs.
>> >
>> > Sure, but bms_join is an optional optimization of the far safer
>> > bms_union operation. It bothers me to create the optimized case
>> > but not the base case.
>>
>> Hmm, yeah. That seems like a good argument for making a new set. I'll
>> go make it so.
>
> Patch attached for the version that creates a new set rather than
> modifying the input set in-place.
>
> David
Hey David,
> Attachments:
> * v2-0001-Introduce-bms_offset_members-function.patch
I applied, tested, and reviewed these changes. Thanks for doing this, only a few small things jumped out.
nit: in bitmapset.c there is a new line added above bms_add_range()
+ * Arguments:
+ * arg1: optional random seed, or < 0 to use a random seed.
+ * arg2: the number of operations to perform.
+ * arg3: the maximum bitmapset member number to use in the random set.
+ * arg4: the minimum bitmapset member number to use in the random set.
nit: whitespace ahead of arg1, also should be "NULL" not "< 0"
in test_bitmapset.sql
+-- perform some random test on bms_offset_members()
nit: "tests"
Also, I think the random testing will likely cover these, but here are a few more explicit tests for odd corner cases.
-- shift that shrinks nwords
SELECT test_bms_offset_members('(b 64 65 66)', -64); -- drops into word 0
-- shift that drops some low members and keeps others
SELECT test_bms_offset_members('(b 0 1 2 10)', -2); -- expect (b 0 8)
-- entire set shifts below zero -> empty
SELECT test_bms_offset_members('(b 1 2 3)', -10); -- expect empty
-- word-aligned positive and negative shifts
SELECT test_bms_offset_members('(b 1 2 3)', 64);
SELECT test_bms_offset_members('(b 65 66 67)', -64);
-- INT_MIN boundary
SELECT test_bms_offset_members('(b 1)', -2147483648);
I like the functionality and the reduction of repeated code that you've identified and fixed.
best.
-greg
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2026-04-19 19:25:42 | Re: First draft of PG 19 release notes |
| Previous Message | Alexander Lakhin | 2026-04-19 19:00:00 | Re: Typos in the code and README |