On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 3:28 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> I propose we introduce the concept of "indirect indexes". I have a toy
> implementation and before I go further with it, I'd like this assembly's
> input on the general direction.
>
> Indirect indexes are similar to regular indexes, except that instead of
> carrying a heap TID as payload, they carry the value of the table's
> primary key. Because this is laid out on top of existing index support
> code, values indexed by the PK can only be six bytes long (the length of
> ItemPointerData); in other words, 281,474,976,710,656 rows are
> supported, which should be sufficient for most use cases.[1]
You don't need that limitation (and vacuum will be simpler) if you add
the PK as another key, akin to:
CREATE INDIRECT INDEX idx ON tab (a, b, c);
turns into
CREATE INDEX idx ON tab (a, b, c, pk);
And is queried appropriately (using an index-only scan, extracting the
PK from the index tuple, and then querying the PK index to get the
tids).
In fact, I believe that can work with all index ams supporting index-only scans.
