Re: Avoid full GIN index scan when possible - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Avoid full GIN index scan when possible
Date
Msg-id 12611.1564670226@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Avoid full GIN index scan when possible  (Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Avoid full GIN index scan when possible  (Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com> writes:
> Attached v4 that should address all comments.

Eyeing this a bit further ... doesn't scanPendingInsert also need
to honor so->forcedRecheck?  Something along the lines of

-            tbm_add_tuples(tbm, &pos.item, 1, recheck);
+            tbm_add_tuples(tbm, &pos.item, 1, recheck | so->forcedRecheck);

at line 1837?  (Obviously, there's more than one way you could
write that.)

I'm also not exactly satisfied with the new comments --- they aren't
conveying much, and the XXX in one of them is confusing; does that
mean you're unsure that the comment is correct?

The added test case seems a bit unsatisfying as well, in that it
fails to retrieve any rows.  It's not very clear what it's
trying to test.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Partial join
Next
From: Dean Rasheed
Date:
Subject: Re: Multivariate MCV list vs. statistics target