Re: Optimizing nbtree ScalarArrayOp execution, allowing multi-column ordered scans, skip scan
От | Matthias van de Meent |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Optimizing nbtree ScalarArrayOp execution, allowing multi-column ordered scans, skip scan |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAEze2Wj4qf=BRtLztv04gvQo1TGKJb+y-BhE4k3ArsC2JMkC8A@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Optimizing nbtree ScalarArrayOp execution, allowing multi-column ordered scans, skip scan (Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Optimizing nbtree ScalarArrayOp execution, allowing multi-column ordered scans, skip scan
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 6 Mar 2024 at 22:46, Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, 6 Mar 2024 at 01:50, Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> wrote: > > At one point Heikki suggested that I just get rid of > > BTScanOpaqueData.arrayKeyData (which has been there for as long as > > nbtree had native support for SAOPs), and use > > BTScanOpaqueData.keyData exclusively instead. I've finally got around > > to doing that now. > > I'm not sure if it was worth the reduced churn when the changes for > the primary optimization are already 150+kB in size; every "small" > addition increases the context needed to review the patch, and it's > already quite complex. To clarify, what I mean here is that merging the changes of both the SAOPs changes and the removal of arrayKeyData seems to increase the patch size and increases the maximum complexity of each component patch's review. Separate patches may make this more reviewable, or not, but no comment was given on why it is better to merge the changes into a single patch. - Matthias
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: