| From: | "Greg Burd" <greg(at)burd(dot)me> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Jeff Davis" <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, "Nathan Bossart" <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Expanding HOT updates for expression and partial indexes |
| Date: | 2026-03-17 18:04:11 |
| Message-ID: | d7489d3e-2cbd-4b0f-b662-b5c4386a3f1e@app.fastmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Mar 17, 2026, at 12:38 PM, Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Mon, 2026-03-16 at 16:51 -0400, Greg Burd wrote:
>> > Also, the "actually changed values" is only valid for a single
>> > tuple,
>> > and it would be good to clarify that and make sure there's not a
>> > lot of
>> > room for confusion there.
>>
>> Yes, that's true... too much confusion and not enough juice for the
>> squeeze. I'm dropping that.
>
> That is an interesting case you found in that the columns targeted by
> an update are not a superset of the columns with actually changed
> values. But I'm not sure exactly what to make of that fact, and if it's
> not important for your other changes then I agree that we should drop
> it.
>
> However, it might be good to comment somewhere that your changes (which
> are based on values in specific tuples) cannot rely on
> ExecGetAllUpdatedCols(), to avoid confusion in the future.
Fair point, I'll do that.
> Regards,
> Jeff Davis
v37 attached with changes you and Nathan asked for so far. More please! :)
thanks Jeff and Nathan!
best.
-greg
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v37-0001-Add-tests-to-cover-a-variety-of-heap-HOT-update-.patch | text/x-patch | 45.3 KB |
| v37-0002-Identify-modified-indexed-attributes-in-the-exec.patch | text/x-patch | 61.4 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alena Rybakina | 2026-03-17 18:11:46 | Re: Vacuum statistics |
| Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2026-03-17 17:51:15 | Re: EXPLAIN: showing ReadStream / prefetch stats |