Re: Shouldn't we have a way to avoid "risky" plans?
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Shouldn't we have a way to avoid "risky" plans? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4286.1300914004@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Shouldn't we have a way to avoid "risky" plans? (Claudio Freire <klaussfreire@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Shouldn't we have a way to avoid "risky" plans?
Re: Shouldn't we have a way to avoid "risky" plans? Re: Shouldn't we have a way to avoid "risky" plans? |
Список | pgsql-performance |
Claudio Freire <klaussfreire@gmail.com> writes: > On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 5:29 PM, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote: >> On 3/23/11 10:35 AM, Claudio Freire wrote: >>> �* �consider plan bailout: execute a tempting plan, if it takes too >>> long or its effective cost raises well above the expected cost, bail >>> to a safer plan >> That would actually solve this particular case. �It would still require >> us to have some definition of "safer" though. > In my head, safer = better worst-case performance. If the planner starts operating on the basis of worst case rather than expected-case performance, the complaints will be far more numerous than they are today. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: