From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: partial indexes and bitmap scans |
Date: | 2017-03-09 16:44:24 |
Message-ID: | 22932.1489077864@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> Perhaps I'm missing something obvious, but isn't it a bit redundant to
> have both a Recheck condition (which is the predicate of the index) and
> a Filter condition (which is the user's predicate) when we've already
> decided that the user's predicate must result in a subset of the
> index's, as, otherwise, we wouldn't be able to use the index in the
> first place?
Yeah, I think this is just something that the planner doesn't see fit
to expend cycles on detecting.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dilip Kumar | 2017-03-09 16:50:56 | Re: Parallel Bitmap scans a bit broken |
Previous Message | Dilip Kumar | 2017-03-09 16:32:12 | Re: Parallel Bitmap scans a bit broken |