Re: Index Skip Scan
| От | Dmitry Dolgov |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Index Skip Scan |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 20200515123802.xhppukhcqemmnbqe@localhost обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Index Skip Scan (Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Index Skip Scan
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
> On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 02:37:21PM +0530, Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> + if (_bt_scankey_within_page(scan, so->skipScanKey, so->currPos.buf, dir))
> + {
>
> Here we expect whether the "next" unique key can be found on this page
> or not, but we are using the function which suggested whether the
> "current" key can be found on this page or not. I think in boundary
> cases where the high key is equal to the current key, this function
> will return true (which is expected from this function), and based on
> that we will simply scan the current page and IMHO that cost could be
> avoided no?
Yes, looks like you're right, there is indeed an unecessary extra scan
happening. To avoid that we can see the key->nextkey and adjust higher
boundary correspondingly. Will also add this into the next rebased
patch, thanks!
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: