Re: POC, WIP: OR-clause support for indexes

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Andrey Lepikhov
Тема Re: POC, WIP: OR-clause support for indexes
Дата
Msg-id b66a863e-b458-bc2b-32a0-df50c21bbd2e@postgrespro.ru
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: POC, WIP: OR-clause support for indexes  (Alena Rybakina <lena.ribackina@yandex.ru>)
Ответы Re: POC, WIP: OR-clause support for indexes  (Alena Rybakina <lena.ribackina@yandex.ru>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On 6/7/2023 03:06, Alena Rybakina wrote:
>> I corrected this constant in the patch.
The patch don't apply cleanly: it contains some trailing spaces.

Also, quick glance into the code shows some weak points;
1. transformBoolExprOr should have input type BoolExpr.
2. You can avoid the switch operator at the beginning of the function, 
because you only need one option.
3. Stale comments: RestrictIinfos definitely not exists at this point.
4. I don't know, you really need to copy the expr or not, but it is 
better to do as late, as possible.
5. You assume, that leftop is non-constant and rightop - constant. Why?
6.I doubt about equivalence operator. Someone can invent a custom '=' 
operator with another semantics, than usual. May be better to check 
mergejoinability?
7. I don't know how to confidently identify constant expressions at this 
level. So, I guess, You can only merge here expressions like 
"F(X)=Const", not an 'F(X)=ConstExpression'.

See delta.diff with mentioned changes in attachment.

-- 
regards,
Andrey Lepikhov
Postgres Professional

Вложения

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Heikki Linnakangas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: MarkGUCPrefixReserved() doesn't check all options
Следующее
От: YANG Xudong
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [PATCH] Add loongarch native checksum implementation.