| From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Floris Van Nee <florisvannee(at)optiver(dot)com> |
| Cc: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andy Fan <zhihui(dot)fan1213(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pg(at)bowt(dot)ie" <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, "jesper(dot)pedersen(at)redhat(dot)com" <jesper(dot)pedersen(at)redhat(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "jtc331(at)gmail(dot)com" <jtc331(at)gmail(dot)com>, "rafia(dot)pghackers(at)gmail(dot)com" <rafia(dot)pghackers(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, "bhushan(dot)uparkar(at)gmail(dot)com" <bhushan(dot)uparkar(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Floris van Nee <floris(dot)vannee(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Index Skip Scan |
| Date: | 2020-03-22 22:23:32 |
| Message-ID: | CA+hUKGJbGCSaHnxo0FkXVUNb7srn70z+_dW2nQoiCWOoPwDP-g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Floris,
On Sun, Mar 22, 2020 at 11:00 AM Floris Van Nee
<florisvannee(at)optiver(dot)com> wrote:
> create index on t1 (a,b,c);
> select * from t1 where b in (100, 200);
> Execution Time: 2.464 ms
> Execution Time: 252.224 ms
> Execution Time: 244.872 ms
Wow. This is very cool work and I'm sure it will become a major
headline feature of PG14 if the requisite planner brains can be sorted
out.
On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 1:55 AM Floris Van Nee <florisvannee(at)optiver(dot)com> wrote:
> I'm unsure which version number to give this patch (to continue with numbers from previous skip scan patches, or to start numbering from scratch again). It's a rather big change, so one could argue it's mostly a separate patch. I guess it mostly depends on how close the original versions were to be committable. Thoughts?
I don't know, but from the sidelines, it'd be nice to see the unique
path part go into PG13, where IIUC it can power the "useless unique
removal" patch.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2020-03-22 22:30:04 | Re: Assert() failures during RI checks |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2020-03-22 22:16:49 | Re: Some improvements to numeric sqrt() and ln() |