On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 11:24 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> The plan has used the index condition just right, but it still perform > aditional bitmap heap scan just to filter for a clause that exactly match > the index. And worse, it double the query cost
The filter condition is required because the bitmap produced by the index can be lossy, ie it might identify more rows than actually satisfy the condition. BitmapHeapNext will only actually apply the condition if the index reports that that happened, so in practice for this sort of query the filter condition probably never gets rechecked.
You are describing a Recheck, but attributing its properties to a Filter. I think that the filter condition always gets checked. It does so if I create a tattler function which raises a notice every time it is called and then build an index on a Boolean expression over that function (but of course that inevitably does change the code paths a bit).
I don't know about being a bug, but it is at least a mild mal-feature that boolean index columns/expressions can't be dealt with better, and have to be handed in a filter rather than in a recheck.
