Re: [HACKERS] longer-term optimizer musings
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] longer-term optimizer musings |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 199903240408.XAA26156@candle.pha.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | longer-term optimizer musings (Erik Riedel <riedel+@CMU.EDU>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] longer-term optimizer musings
Re: [HACKERS] longer-term optimizer musings |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> As with my previous posts, this is most likely not a general solution, > it's just an idea that works (very well) for the query I am looking > at, and has some general applicability. I am sure that the above > ignores a number of "bigger picture" issues, but it does help the > particular query I care about. > > Also note that none of this actually speeds up even my query, it only > makes the optimizer estimate much closer to the actual query cost > (which is what I care about for the work I am doing). > > Maybe this will be of help in any future work on the optimizer. Maybe > it is simply the rantings of a lunatic. Interesting. The problem I see is that trying to do a char(20) column with min(A) and max(B) can have 256^19 possible unique values from A to B, so it kind if kills many general cases. Floats have the same problem. A nice general fix would be to assume GROUP BY/AGG returns only 10% of the existing rows. I don't even know if an Aggregate without a group by knows it only returns one row. Oops, I guess not: test=> explain select max(relpages) from pg_class;NOTICE: QUERY PLAN:Aggregate (cost=2.58 size=0 width=0) -> Seq Scanon pg_class (cost=2.58 size=48 width=4) Basically, there are some major issues with this optimizer. Only in pre 6.5 have we really dug into it and cleaned up some glaring problems. Problems that were so bad, if I had know how bad they were, I would certainly have started digging in there sooner. We have even general cases that are not being handled as well as they should be. We just fixed a bug where "col = -3" was never using an index, because -3 was being parsed as prefix "-" with an operand of 3, and the index code can only handle constants. Yes, we have some major things that need cleaning. I have updated optimizer/README to better explain what is happening in there, and have renamed many of the structures/variables to be clearer. I hope it helps someone, someday. So I guess I am saying that your ideas are good, but we need to walk before we can run with this optimizer. I am not saying the optimizer is terrible, just that it is complex, and has not had the kind of code maintenance it needs. -- Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle maillist@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania19026
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: