Re: [PATCH] Incremental sort (was: PoC: Partial sort)
От | Tomas Vondra |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PATCH] Incremental sort (was: PoC: Partial sort) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20190904191710.gogtnktjbvtg5zq3@development обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [PATCH] Incremental sort (was: PoC: Partial sort) (Rafia Sabih <rafia.pghackers@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [PATCH] Incremental sort (was: PoC: Partial sort)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Sep 04, 2019 at 11:37:48AM +0200, Rafia Sabih wrote: >On Tue, 30 Jul 2019 at 02:17, Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> >wrote: > >> On Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 01:34:22PM +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote: >> > >> > ... >> > >> >I wonder if we're approaching this wrong. Maybe we should not reverse >> >engineer queries for the various places, but just start with a set of >> >queries that we want to optimize, and then identify which places in the >> >planner need to be modified. >> > >> >> I've decided to do a couple of experiments, trying to make my mind about >> which modified places matter to diffrent queries. But instead of trying >> to reverse engineer the queries, I've taken a different approach - I've >> compiled a list of queries that I think are sensible and relevant, and >> then planned them with incremental sort enabled in different places. >> >> I don't have any clear conclusions at this point - it does show some of >> the places don't change plan for any of the queries, although there may >> be some additional query where it'd make a difference. >> >> But I'm posting this mostly because it might be useful. I've initially >> planned to move changes that add incremental sort paths to separate >> patches, and then apply/skip different subsets of those patches. But >> then I realized there's a better way to do this - I've added a bunch of >> GUCs, one for each such place. This allows doing this testing without >> having to rebuild repeatedly. >> >> I'm not going to post the patch(es) with extra GUCs here, because it'd >> just confuse the patch tester, but it's available here: >> >> https://github.com/tvondra/postgres/tree/incremental-sort-20190730 >> >> There are 10 GUCs, one for each place in planner where incremental sort >> paths are constructed. By default all those are set to 'false' so no >> incremental sort paths are built. If you do >> >> SET devel_create_ordered_paths = on; >> >> it'll start creating the paths in non-parallel in create_ordered_paths. >> Then you may enable devel_create_ordered_paths_parallel to also consider >> parallel paths, etc. >> >> The list of queries (synthetic, but hopefully sufficiently realistic) >> and a couple of scripts to collect the plans is in this repository: >> >> https://github.com/tvondra/incremental-sort-tests-2 >> >> There's also a spreadsheet with a summary of results, with a visual >> representation of which GUCs affect which queries. >> > Wow, that sounds like an elaborate experiment. But where is this > spreadsheet you mentioned ? > It seems I forgot to push the commit containing the spreadsheet with results. I'll fix that tomorrow. regards -- Tomas Vondra http://www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: