Re: [HACKERS] Indirect indexes - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Indirect indexes
Date
Msg-id 20161224023130.mis6hcow6d3xly4i@alvherre.pgsql
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Indirect indexes  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Indirect indexes  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera wrote:

> There are a few broken things yet, such as "REINDEX TABLE pg_class" and
> some other operations specifically on pg_class.  This one in particular
> breaks the regression tests, but that shouldn't be terribly difficult to
> fix.

This version fixes this problem, so the regression tests now pass.
I fixed it by adding yet another index attribute bitmapset to
RelationData, so we keep track of "all indexed columns" separately from
"columns used by regular indexes" and "columns used by indirect
indexes".  A possible optimization is to remove the first list and just
keep "indirect" and "direct", and in the only case where we need all of
them, do a bms_union -- it's not performance-critical anyway.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pg_stat_activity.waiting_start
Next
From: Joel Jacobson
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pg_stat_activity.waiting_start