> >On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 09:29:32AM +1300, David Rowley wrote: > On Tue, 10 Mar 2020 at 08:56, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthali...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Assuming we'll implement it in a way that we do not know about what kind > > of path type is that in create_distinct_path, then it can also work for > > ProjectionPath or anything else (if UniqueKeys are present). But then > > still EquivalenceMember are used only to figure out correct > > distinctPrefixKeys and do not affect whether or not skipping is applied. > > What do I miss? > > I'm not sure I fully understand the question correctly, but let me > explain further. > > In the 0001 patch, standard_qp_callback sets the query_uniquekeys > depending on the DISTINCT / GROUP BY clause. When building index > paths in build_index_paths(), the 0002 patch should be looking at the > root->query_uniquekeys to see if it can build any index paths that > suit those keys. Such paths should be tagged with the uniquekeys they > satisfy, basically, exactly the same as how pathkeys work. Many > create_*_path functions will need to be modified to carry forward > their uniquekeys. For example, create_projection_path(), > create_limit_path() don't do anything which would cause the created > path to violate the unique keys. This way when you get down to > create_distinct_paths(), paths other than IndexPath may have > uniquekeys. You'll be able to check which existing paths satisfy the > unique keys required by the DISTINCT / GROUP BY and select those paths > instead of having to create any HashAggregate / Unique paths. > > Does that answer the question?
Hmm... I'm afraid no, this was already clear. But looks like now I see that I've misinterpreted one part. > There's also some weird looking assumptions that an EquivalenceMember > can only be a Var in create_distinct_paths(). I think you're only > saved from crashing there because a ProjectionPath will be created > atop of the IndexPath to evaluate expressions, in which case you're > not seeing the IndexPath. This results in the optimisation not > working in cases like: I've read it as "an assumption that an EquivalenceMember can only be a Var" results in "the optimisation not working in cases like this". But you've meant that ignoring a ProjectionPath with an IndexPath inside results in this optimisation not working, right? If so, then everything is clear, and my apologies, maybe I need to finally fix my sleep schedule :)