diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'src/backend/optimizer/path/indxpath.c')
| -rw-r--r-- | src/backend/optimizer/path/indxpath.c | 119 |
1 files changed, 60 insertions, 59 deletions
diff --git a/src/backend/optimizer/path/indxpath.c b/src/backend/optimizer/path/indxpath.c index 7810012b2b0..b15affa54d5 100644 --- a/src/backend/optimizer/path/indxpath.c +++ b/src/backend/optimizer/path/indxpath.c @@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ * * * IDENTIFICATION - * $PostgreSQL: pgsql/src/backend/optimizer/path/indxpath.c,v 1.211 2006/07/22 15:41:55 tgl Exp $ + * $PostgreSQL: pgsql/src/backend/optimizer/path/indxpath.c,v 1.212 2006/10/04 00:29:54 momjian Exp $ * *------------------------------------------------------------------------- */ @@ -54,10 +54,10 @@ static List *find_saop_paths(PlannerInfo *root, RelOptInfo *rel, List *clauses, List *outer_clauses, bool istoplevel, RelOptInfo *outer_rel); static Path *choose_bitmap_and(PlannerInfo *root, RelOptInfo *rel, - List *paths, RelOptInfo *outer_rel); + List *paths, RelOptInfo *outer_rel); static int bitmap_path_comparator(const void *a, const void *b); static Cost bitmap_and_cost_est(PlannerInfo *root, RelOptInfo *rel, - List *paths, RelOptInfo *outer_rel); + List *paths, RelOptInfo *outer_rel); static List *pull_indexpath_quals(Path *bitmapqual); static bool lists_intersect_ptr(List *list1, List *list2); static bool match_clause_to_indexcol(IndexOptInfo *index, @@ -66,7 +66,7 @@ static bool match_clause_to_indexcol(IndexOptInfo *index, Relids outer_relids, SaOpControl saop_control); static bool is_indexable_operator(Oid expr_op, Oid opclass, - bool indexkey_on_left); + bool indexkey_on_left); static bool match_rowcompare_to_indexcol(IndexOptInfo *index, int indexcol, Oid opclass, @@ -324,8 +324,8 @@ find_usable_indexes(PlannerInfo *root, RelOptInfo *rel, /* * 1. Match the index against the available restriction clauses. * found_clause is set true only if at least one of the current - * clauses was used (and, if saop_control is SAOP_REQUIRE, it - * has to have been a ScalarArrayOpExpr clause). + * clauses was used (and, if saop_control is SAOP_REQUIRE, it has to + * have been a ScalarArrayOpExpr clause). */ restrictclauses = group_clauses_by_indexkey(index, clauses, @@ -422,8 +422,8 @@ find_saop_paths(PlannerInfo *root, RelOptInfo *rel, ListCell *l; /* - * Since find_usable_indexes is relatively expensive, don't bother to - * run it unless there are some top-level ScalarArrayOpExpr clauses. + * Since find_usable_indexes is relatively expensive, don't bother to run + * it unless there are some top-level ScalarArrayOpExpr clauses. */ foreach(l, clauses) { @@ -588,15 +588,15 @@ choose_bitmap_and(PlannerInfo *root, RelOptInfo *rel, * In theory we should consider every nonempty subset of the given paths. * In practice that seems like overkill, given the crude nature of the * estimates, not to mention the possible effects of higher-level AND and - * OR clauses. As a compromise, we sort the paths by selectivity. We + * OR clauses. As a compromise, we sort the paths by selectivity. We * always take the first, and sequentially add on paths that result in a * lower estimated cost. * * We also make some effort to detect directly redundant input paths, as - * can happen if there are multiple possibly usable indexes. (Another - * way it can happen is that best_inner_indexscan will find the same OR - * join clauses that create_or_index_quals has pulled OR restriction - * clauses out of, and then both versions show up as duplicate paths.) We + * can happen if there are multiple possibly usable indexes. (Another way + * it can happen is that best_inner_indexscan will find the same OR join + * clauses that create_or_index_quals has pulled OR restriction clauses + * out of, and then both versions show up as duplicate paths.) We * consider an index redundant if any of its index conditions were already * used by earlier indexes. (We could use predicate_implied_by to have a * more intelligent, but much more expensive, check --- but in most cases @@ -796,7 +796,7 @@ lists_intersect_ptr(List *list1, List *list2) foreach(cell1, list1) { - void *datum1 = lfirst(cell1); + void *datum1 = lfirst(cell1); ListCell *cell2; foreach(cell2, list2) @@ -963,7 +963,7 @@ group_clauses_by_indexkey(IndexOptInfo *index, * It is also possible to match RowCompareExpr clauses to indexes (but * currently, only btree indexes handle this). In this routine we will * report a match if the first column of the row comparison matches the - * target index column. This is sufficient to guarantee that some index + * target index column. This is sufficient to guarantee that some index * condition can be constructed from the RowCompareExpr --- whether the * remaining columns match the index too is considered in * expand_indexqual_rowcompare(). @@ -1004,10 +1004,10 @@ match_clause_to_indexcol(IndexOptInfo *index, bool plain_op; /* - * Never match pseudoconstants to indexes. (Normally this could not - * happen anyway, since a pseudoconstant clause couldn't contain a - * Var, but what if someone builds an expression index on a constant? - * It's not totally unreasonable to do so with a partial index, either.) + * Never match pseudoconstants to indexes. (Normally this could not + * happen anyway, since a pseudoconstant clause couldn't contain a Var, + * but what if someone builds an expression index on a constant? It's not + * totally unreasonable to do so with a partial index, either.) */ if (rinfo->pseudoconstant) return false; @@ -1421,9 +1421,9 @@ best_inner_indexscan(PlannerInfo *root, RelOptInfo *rel, * NOTE: because we cache on outer_relids rather than outer_rel->relids, * we will report the same path and hence path cost for joins with * different sets of irrelevant rels on the outside. Now that cost_index - * is sensitive to outer_rel->rows, this is not really right. However - * the error is probably not large. Is it worth establishing a separate - * cache entry for each distinct outer_rel->relids set to get this right? + * is sensitive to outer_rel->rows, this is not really right. However the + * error is probably not large. Is it worth establishing a separate cache + * entry for each distinct outer_rel->relids set to get this right? */ foreach(l, rel->index_inner_paths) { @@ -1442,11 +1442,11 @@ best_inner_indexscan(PlannerInfo *root, RelOptInfo *rel, * * Note: because we include restriction clauses, we will find indexscans * that could be plain indexscans, ie, they don't require the join context - * at all. This may seem redundant, but we need to include those scans in + * at all. This may seem redundant, but we need to include those scans in * the input given to choose_bitmap_and() to be sure we find optimal AND - * combinations of join and non-join scans. Also, even if the "best - * inner indexscan" is just a plain indexscan, it will have a different - * cost estimate because of cache effects. + * combinations of join and non-join scans. Also, even if the "best inner + * indexscan" is just a plain indexscan, it will have a different cost + * estimate because of cache effects. */ clause_list = find_clauses_for_join(root, rel, outer_relids, isouterjoin); @@ -2210,7 +2210,7 @@ expand_indexqual_conditions(IndexOptInfo *index, List *clausegroups) foreach(l, (List *) lfirst(clausegroup_item)) { RestrictInfo *rinfo = (RestrictInfo *) lfirst(l); - Expr *clause = rinfo->clause; + Expr *clause = rinfo->clause; /* First check for boolean cases */ if (IsBooleanOpclass(curClass)) @@ -2240,7 +2240,7 @@ expand_indexqual_conditions(IndexOptInfo *index, List *clausegroups) { resultquals = list_concat(resultquals, expand_indexqual_opclause(rinfo, - curClass)); + curClass)); } else if (IsA(clause, ScalarArrayOpExpr)) { @@ -2340,6 +2340,7 @@ static List * expand_indexqual_opclause(RestrictInfo *rinfo, Oid opclass) { Expr *clause = rinfo->clause; + /* we know these will succeed */ Node *leftop = get_leftop(clause); Node *rightop = get_rightop(clause); @@ -2421,7 +2422,7 @@ expand_indexqual_opclause(RestrictInfo *rinfo, Oid opclass) * column matches) or a simple OpExpr (if the first-column match is all * there is). In these cases the modified clause is always "<=" or ">=" * even when the original was "<" or ">" --- this is necessary to match all - * the rows that could match the original. (We are essentially building a + * the rows that could match the original. (We are essentially building a * lossy version of the row comparison when we do this.) */ static RestrictInfo * @@ -2430,18 +2431,18 @@ expand_indexqual_rowcompare(RestrictInfo *rinfo, int indexcol) { RowCompareExpr *clause = (RowCompareExpr *) rinfo->clause; - bool var_on_left; - int op_strategy; - Oid op_subtype; - bool op_recheck; - int matching_cols; - Oid expr_op; - List *opclasses; - List *subtypes; - List *new_ops; - ListCell *largs_cell; - ListCell *rargs_cell; - ListCell *opnos_cell; + bool var_on_left; + int op_strategy; + Oid op_subtype; + bool op_recheck; + int matching_cols; + Oid expr_op; + List *opclasses; + List *subtypes; + List *new_ops; + ListCell *largs_cell; + ListCell *rargs_cell; + ListCell *opnos_cell; /* We have to figure out (again) how the first col matches */ var_on_left = match_index_to_operand((Node *) linitial(clause->largs), @@ -2459,12 +2460,12 @@ expand_indexqual_rowcompare(RestrictInfo *rinfo, subtypes = list_make1_oid(op_subtype); /* - * See how many of the remaining columns match some index column - * in the same way. A note about rel membership tests: we assume - * that the clause as a whole is already known to use only Vars from - * the indexed relation and possibly some acceptable outer relations. - * So the "other" side of any potential index condition is OK as long - * as it doesn't use Vars from the indexed relation. + * See how many of the remaining columns match some index column in the + * same way. A note about rel membership tests: we assume that the clause + * as a whole is already known to use only Vars from the indexed relation + * and possibly some acceptable outer relations. So the "other" side of + * any potential index condition is OK as long as it doesn't use Vars from + * the indexed relation. */ matching_cols = 1; largs_cell = lnext(list_head(clause->largs)); @@ -2498,10 +2499,10 @@ expand_indexqual_rowcompare(RestrictInfo *rinfo, break; /* no good, volatile comparison value */ /* - * The Var side can match any column of the index. If the user - * does something weird like having multiple identical index - * columns, we insist the match be on the first such column, - * to avoid confusing the executor. + * The Var side can match any column of the index. If the user does + * something weird like having multiple identical index columns, we + * insist the match be on the first such column, to avoid confusing + * the executor. */ for (i = 0; i < index->ncolumns; i++) { @@ -2534,9 +2535,9 @@ expand_indexqual_rowcompare(RestrictInfo *rinfo, return rinfo; /* - * We have to generate a subset rowcompare (possibly just one OpExpr). - * The painful part of this is changing < to <= or > to >=, so deal with - * that first. + * We have to generate a subset rowcompare (possibly just one OpExpr). The + * painful part of this is changing < to <= or > to >=, so deal with that + * first. */ if (op_strategy == BTLessEqualStrategyNumber || op_strategy == BTGreaterEqualStrategyNumber) @@ -2546,8 +2547,8 @@ expand_indexqual_rowcompare(RestrictInfo *rinfo, } else { - ListCell *opclasses_cell; - ListCell *subtypes_cell; + ListCell *opclasses_cell; + ListCell *subtypes_cell; if (op_strategy == BTLessStrategyNumber) op_strategy = BTLessEqualStrategyNumber; @@ -2561,13 +2562,13 @@ expand_indexqual_rowcompare(RestrictInfo *rinfo, expr_op = get_opclass_member(lfirst_oid(opclasses_cell), lfirst_oid(subtypes_cell), op_strategy); - if (!OidIsValid(expr_op)) /* should not happen */ + if (!OidIsValid(expr_op)) /* should not happen */ elog(ERROR, "could not find member %d of opclass %u", op_strategy, lfirst_oid(opclasses_cell)); if (!var_on_left) { expr_op = get_commutator(expr_op); - if (!OidIsValid(expr_op)) /* should not happen */ + if (!OidIsValid(expr_op)) /* should not happen */ elog(ERROR, "could not find commutator of member %d of opclass %u", op_strategy, lfirst_oid(opclasses_cell)); } @@ -2596,7 +2597,7 @@ expand_indexqual_rowcompare(RestrictInfo *rinfo, } else { - Expr *opexpr; + Expr *opexpr; opexpr = make_opclause(linitial_oid(new_ops), BOOLOID, false, copyObject(linitial(clause->largs)), |