Re: Expanding HOT updates for expression and partial indexes - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

Thanks for the new patch.  As a general note, please be sure to run
pgindent on patches.  My review is still rather surface-level, sorry.

On Tue, Mar 17, 2026 at 02:04:11PM -0400, Greg Burd wrote:
> -    id_attrs = RelationGetIndexAttrBitmap(relation,
> -                                          INDEX_ATTR_BITMAP_IDENTITY_KEY);
> [...]
> +    rid_attrs = RelationGetIndexAttrBitmap(relation, INDEX_ATTR_BITMAP_IDENTITY_KEY);

I'm nitpicking, but it took me a while to parse the
replica-identity-related code in heap_update() until I discovered that this
variable was renamed.  I think we ought to leave the name alone.

>      /*
>       * At this point newbuf and buffer are both pinned and locked, and newbuf
> -     * has enough space for the new tuple.  If they are the same buffer, only
> -     * one pin is held.
> +     * has enough space for the new tuple so we can use the HOT update path if
> +     * the caller determined that it is allowable.
> +     *
> +     * NOTE: If newbuf == buffer then only one pin is held.
>       */
> -
>      if (newbuf == buffer)

Sorry, more nitpicks.  In addition to the unnecessary removal of the blank
line, I'm not sure the changes to this comment are needed.

> -    /*
> -     * If it is a HOT update, the update may still need to update summarized
> -     * indexes, lest we fail to update those summaries and get incorrect
> -     * results (for example, minmax bounds of the block may change with this
> -     * update).
> -     */
> -    if (use_hot_update)
> -    {
> -        if (summarized_update)
> -            *update_indexes = TU_Summarizing;
> -        else
> -            *update_indexes = TU_None;
> -    }
> -    else
> -        *update_indexes = TU_All;

So, the "HOT but still need to update summarized indexes" code has been
moved from heap_update() to HeapUpdateHotAllowable(), which is called by
heap_update()'s callers (i.e., simple_heap_update() and
heapam_tuple_update()).  That looks correct to me at a glance.

> -simple_heap_update(Relation relation, const ItemPointerData *otid, HeapTuple tup,
> +simple_heap_update(Relation relation, const ItemPointerData *otid, HeapTuple tuple,

nitpick: This variable name change looks unnecessary.

> @@ -944,8 +946,13 @@ ExecSimpleRelationUpdate(ResultRelInfo *resultRelInfo,
>          if (rel->rd_rel->relispartition)
>              ExecPartitionCheck(resultRelInfo, slot, estate, true);
>  
> +        modified_idx_attrs = ExecUpdateModifiedIdxAttrs(resultRelInfo,
> +                                                        estate, searchslot, slot);
> +
>          simple_table_tuple_update(rel, tid, slot, estate->es_snapshot,
> -                                  &update_indexes);
> +                                  modified_idx_attrs, &update_indexes);
> +        bms_free(modified_idx_attrs);

I don't know how constructive of a comment this is, but this change in
particular seems quite out of place.  It feels odd to me that we expect
callers of simple_table_tuple_update() to determine the
modified-index-attributes.  I guess I'm confused why this work doesn't
belong one level down, i.e., in the tuple_update function.

> - *    INDEX_ATTR_BITMAP_SUMMARIZED    Columns included in summarizing indexes
> + *    INDEX_ATTR_BITMAP_INDEXED        Columns referenced by indexes
> + *    INDEX_ATTR_BITMAP_SUMMARIZED    Columns only included in summarizing indexes

> -    Bitmapset  *summarizedattrs;    /* columns with summarizing indexes */
> +    Bitmapset  *indexedattrs;    /* columns referenced by indexes */
> +    Bitmapset  *summarizedattrs;    /* columns only in summarizing indexes */

As before, the comment changes for the summarized-attr-related stuff seem
unnecessary.

>          if (indexDesc->rd_indam->amsummarizing)
>              attrs = &summarizedattrs;
>          else
> -            attrs = &hotblockingattrs;
> +            attrs = &indexedattrs;

> +    /*
> +     * Record what attributes are only referenced by summarizing indexes. Then
> +     * add that into the other indexed attributes to track all referenced
> +     * attributes.
> +     */
> +    summarizedattrs = bms_del_members(summarizedattrs, indexedattrs);
> +    indexedattrs = bms_add_members(indexedattrs, summarizedattrs);

The difference between hotblockingattrs and indexedattrs seems quite
subtle.  Am I understanding correctly that indexedattrs is essentially just
hotblockingattrs + summarizedattrs?  And that this is all meant for
INDEX_ATTR_BITMAP_INDEXED?

-    INJECTION_POINT("heap_update-before-pin", NULL);
+    INJECTION_POINT("simple_heap_update-before-pin", NULL);

Why was this changed in heap_update()?

-- 
nathan