From: | Chengpeng Yan <chengpeng_yan(at)Outlook(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Allow virtual columns in index expressions or predicate |
Date: | 2025-10-03 09:10:35 |
Message-ID: | 8D88383B-FB2C-443E-A999-930A4DCD25C8@Outlook.com |
Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sep 30, 2025, at 17:13, Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
I'm looking for a solution to support virtual generated columns in
index expressions or predicate. The comment in DefineIndex() seems to
suggest that virtual generated columns there can be expanded in
RelationGetIndexExpressions() and RelationGetIndexPredicate().
/*
* XXX Virtual generated columns in index expressions or predicates
* could be supported, but it needs support in
* RelationGetIndexExpressions() and RelationGetIndexPredicate().
*/
I'm not sure this is the appropriate approach, especially since we
don't have the heap relation available in these functions. I think
we're good as long as we expand the virtual columns before the index
build process; otherwise, evaluating these expressions during the
build will cause executor errors due to unexpanded virtual columns.
I wonder if we can do the expansion in DefineIndex(), before the call
to index_create(), like the attached.
- Richard
<v1-0001-Allow-virtual-columns-in-index-expressions-or-pre.patch>
Hi Richard.
This is a good usability improvement, making it easier to create an index when a virtual column is in an expression or a WHERE clause.
It might also be nice if this could be extended to allow creating an index directly on the virtual column, like CREATE INDEX ON tbl (virtual_col).
If we view this feature as a "syntactic sugar" to simplify creating an expression index, then I think this patch is very easy to accept.
However, if we consider more complex situations, like a user running ALTER TABLE ... SET EXPRESSION, it raises more questions. Whether we need to add the kind of full support for these cases that was discussed in [1] needs a more detailed discussion. But for the simpler goal of being a syntax improvement, this patch works well.
Thanks,
Chengpeng Yan
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Mingli Zhang | 2025-10-03 09:16:50 | Re: Fix incorrect function reference BufFileOpenShared in comment. |
Previous Message | Daniel Gustafsson | 2025-10-03 08:25:58 | Re: [PATCH] Add tests for Bitmapset |