writeonce/docs/plan/exploration/postgresql/indexing-and-point-lookup.md

Indexing & point lookup — how Postgres never full-scans for =

The access-method algorithms, and the mechanism that turns an equality predicate into a direct row address instead of a table walk. Tree: 19devel; paths into reference/postgresql/. Written for the read-path finding iteration 22 measured: writeonce point lookups are O(table) (~1.5k reads/s at p50 600µs on 20k rows).

The access-method roster (facts, with paths)

AM	algorithm	serves	point lookup
nbtree	Lehman–Yao B-tree (access/nbtree/README:6)	< <= = >= >, IN, ordered scans, prefix LIKE	O(log N) page descents
hash	Seltzer/Yigit extendible hashing (access/hash/README:6)	= only	O(1) expected: metapage + bucket-page binary search
gin	inverted index: btree of keys → posting lists (access/gin/README:17)	containment, full-text	bitmap-only (no amgettuple)
gist	generalized balanced tree, opclass consistent (access/gist/README:8)	overlap, kNN	multi-subtree descent
spgist	space-partitioned tries/quadtrees, non-balanced (access/spgist/README:3)	points, prefixes	data-bounded depth
brin	per-block-range min/max summaries (access/brin/README:4)	huge clustered scans	none — lossy bitmap

Algorithm notes worth keeping:

• btree: Lehman–Yao's right-link + high-key lets descents run lock-free past concurrent splits (nbtree/README:17-29); equality and range use the SAME descent — _bt_first positions, _bt_next walks siblings (nbtsearch.c:883/:1586); heap TID is a tiebreaker making every key unique per level.
• hash: bucket count doubles at split points; one bucket splits at a time (linear hashing, hash/README:14-22,60-79); bucket resolution is a MASK — bucket = hash & highmask; if > maxbucket then & lowmask (hashutil.c:125); entries sorted by hash within a page for binary search. Fully WAL-logged in this tree (the old caveat is gone); btree's remaining edge is capability, not durability: only btree does unique constraints, ordered scans, and range predicates.

Why = never scans the table

1. The planner builds BOTH paths and costs them: seqscan cost is unconditionally whole-relation (pages × seq_page_cost + tuples × cpu_tuple_cost, costsize.c:270); index cost scales by SELECTIVITY (cost_index, :545, delegating to the AM's amcostestimate). A selective equality wins by arithmetic, not by rule.
2. An index entry stores a TID — (block, offset), 6 bytes (storage/itemptr.h:36): the ROW'S ADDRESS. The executor path is IndexScan → btgettuple → index_fetch_heap reads exactly ONE heap page and one line pointer (indexam.c:698). The index answers "where", the heap answers "what" — nothing walks.

The writeonce translation — O(1) lookups are one wiring change

What exists (database/src/table.c):

• The id path is ALREADY the TID story: hget (open-addressing hash, :260) maps id → global slot + 1, and the slot IS the address (slab base + offset — addresses stable forever). O(1), proven by db-bench's 297k inserts/s.
• Secondary indexes ALREADY exist as a hash multimap — db_index/db_ibucket (idx_hash/idx_bucket, :302/:342), the same expected-O(1) shape as Postgres' hash AM (minus its paging, which a RAM-authoritative store does not need). Maintained inside the insert/remove/update choke points, exactly where they belong.

The measured gap: the read path never asks the index. Both WO_B_DB_PROBE (db.c:125) and its RPC twin in wo_db_exec_req read the index metadata only for the key column's KIND, then walk EVERY slab comparing values — Postgres' seqscan, unconditionally, on a column that has a live hash index. wo_row_has_referrers (FK restrict) is the same story across all tables.

Direction the next slice takes (words only):

1. Probe = idx_bucket(ix, hash(key)), then verify equality against the bucket's ids via wo_row_ptr (a hash is a hint, never an answer — the engine's own doctrine, already enforced on the unique path). Expected O(1); the bucket wins by the same arithmetic that makes Postgres pick the index.
2. Multi-column indexes probe on the FULL column set today (idx_hash hashes all cols) — a single-column equality over a composite index needs either a leading-column bucket layout or a declared single-column index; the slice decides, the bench arbitrates.
3. FK restrict + backlink reads ride the same probe once the grammar card's rule lands (backlink implies the FK-column index).
4. Non-goals, recorded: no btree (no ordered-scan workload yet — order by sorts materialized results today), no planner (one AM, one rule: indexed equality probes, everything else scans), no paging (RAM-authoritative; the WAL is the disk story).

Acceptance shape for that slice: db-bench read/query move from ~1.5k ops/s to the same order as inserts; bench/baseline.json refreshed with the delta recorded — the gate exists precisely so this claim gets measured.