Re: Question about Bitmap Heap Scan/BitmapAnd - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Question about Bitmap Heap Scan/BitmapAnd
Date
Msg-id 1285.1171385353@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Question about Bitmap Heap Scan/BitmapAnd  ("Guillaume Smet" <guillaume.smet@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Question about Bitmap Heap Scan/BitmapAnd
List pgsql-performance
"Guillaume Smet" <guillaume.smet@gmail.com> writes:
> What surprises me is that "parking" is in the filter and not in the
> Recheck Cond whereas it's part of the second Bitmap Index Scan of the
> Bitmap And node.

That's probably because of this:

    /*
     * When dealing with special or lossy operators, we will at this point
     * have duplicate clauses in qpqual and bitmapqualorig.  We may as well
     * drop 'em from bitmapqualorig, since there's no point in making the
     * tests twice.
     */
    bitmapqualorig = list_difference_ptr(bitmapqualorig, qpqual);

What's not immediately clear is why the condition was in both lists to
start with.  Perhaps idx_lieu_parking is a partial index with this as
its WHERE condition?

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: "Guillaume Smet"
Date:
Subject: Question about Bitmap Heap Scan/BitmapAnd
Next
From: "Guillaume Smet"
Date:
Subject: Proximity query with GIST and row estimation