On 2019-Sep-05, Dmitry Dolgov wrote:
> Here is the version in which stepping between the pages works better. It seems
> sufficient to fix the case you've mentioned before, but for that we need to
> propagate keepPrev logic through `_bt_steppage` & `_bt_readnextpage`, and I
> can't say I like this solution. I have an idea that maybe it would be simpler
> to teach the code after index_skip to not do `_bt_next` right after one skip
> happened before. It should immediately elliminate several hacks from index
> skip
> itself, so I'll try to pursue this idea.
Cool.
I think multiplying two ScanDirections to watch for a negative result is
pretty ugly:
/*
* If advancing direction is different from index direction, we
must
* skip right away, but _bt_skip requires a starting point.
*/
if (direction * indexscan->indexorderdir < 0 &&
!node->iss_FirstTupleEmitted)
Surely there's a better way to code that?
I think "scanstart" needs more documentation, both in the SGML docs as
well as the code comments surrounding it.
Please disregard my earlier comment about FirstTupleEmitted. I was
thinking that index_skip would itself emit a tuple (ie. call some
"getnext" internally) rather than just repositioning. There might still
be some more convenient way to represent this, but I have no immediate
advice.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
