Gurjeet Singh <singh.gurj...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 8:24 AM, Heikki Linnakangas <
> heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>> On 11.02.2011 22:44, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
>>> One one hand get_actual_variable_range() expects that virtual indexes do
>>> not
>>> have an OID assigned, on the other hand explain_get_index_name_hook() is
>>> handed just an index's OID to get its name back; IMHO these are based on
>>> two
>>> conflicting assumptions about whether a virtual index will have an OID
>>> assigned.
>> The new hook takes an index oid as argument, so I gather that you resolved
>> the contradiction by deciding that fictitious indexes have OIDs. How do you
>> assign those OIDs? Do fictitious indexes have entries in pg_index?
> No, a fictitious index does not touch pg_index. The Index Advisor uses
> GetNewOid(pg_class) to generate a new OID for the fictitious index.
That seems like a very expensive, and lock-inducing, way of assigning a
fictitious OID. They don't need to be globally unique. I suggest you
consider the idea I suggested back in 2007:
* In this toy example we just assign all hypothetical indexes
* OID 0, and the explain_get_index_name hook just prints
* <hypothetical index>. In a realistic situation we'd probably
* assume that OIDs smaller than, say, 100 are never the OID of
* any real index, allowing us to identify one of up to 100
* hypothetical indexes per plan. Then we'd need to save aside
* some state data that would let the explain hooks print info
* about the selected index.
As far as the immediate problem goes, I agree that
get_actual_variable_range is mistaken, but I think a cleaner and cheaper
solution would be to add a bool "hypothetical" to IndexOptInfo.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
