Re: POC, WIP: OR-clause support for indexes - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alexander Korotkov
Subject Re: POC, WIP: OR-clause support for indexes
Date
Msg-id CAPpHfdtPkA3XGM+FOanXfFNm45YEMkuqpfL0ZSL7uOP1bHPPEg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: POC, WIP: OR-clause support for indexes  (Andrei Lepikhov <lepihov@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 8:20 AM Andrei Lepikhov <lepihov@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 18/11/2024 06:19, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 15, 2024 at 3:27 PM Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Here is the next revision of this patch.  No material changes,
> > adjustments for comments and commit message.
> I have passed through the code and found no issues. Maybe only phrase:
> "eval_const_expressions() will be simplified if there is more than one."
> which is used in both patches: here, the 'will' may be removed, as for me.

Exactly same wording is used in match_index_to_operand().  So, I think
we can save this.

> Also, I re-read the thread, and as AFAICS, no other issues remain. So, I
> think it would be OK to move the status of this feature to 'ready for
> committer'.

Yes, I also re-read the thread.  One thing caught my eye is that
Robert didn't answer my point that as we generally don't care about
lazy parameters evaluation while pushing quals as index conds then we
don't have to do this in this patch.  I think there were quite amount
of time to express disagreement if any.  If even this question will
arise, that's well isolated issue which could be nailed down later.

I'm going to push this if no objections.

Links.
1. https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAPpHfdt8kowRDUkmOnO7_WJJQ1uk%2BO379JiZCk_9_Pt5AQ4%2B0w%40mail.gmail.com

------
Regards,
Alexander Korotkov
Supabase



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Shlok Kyal
Date:
Subject: Re: Logical replication timeout
Next
From: torikoshia
Date:
Subject: Re: Add reject_limit option to file_fdw