Re: disfavoring unparameterized nested loops
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: disfavoring unparameterized nested loops |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 482086.1664495178@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: disfavoring unparameterized nested loops (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: disfavoring unparameterized nested loops
Re: disfavoring unparameterized nested loops Re: disfavoring unparameterized nested loops Re: disfavoring unparameterized nested loops |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes: > I think the point the original poster as making, and I have made in the > past, is that even of two optimizer costs are the same, one might be > more penalized by misestimation than the other, and we don't have a good > way of figuring that into our plan choices. Agreed, but dealing with uncertainty in those numbers is an enormous task if you want to do it right. "Doing it right", IMV, would start out by extending all the selectivity estimation functions to include error bars; then we could have error bars on rowcount estimates and then costs; then we could start adding policies about avoiding plans with too large a possible upper-bound cost. Trying to add such policy with no data to go on is not going to work well. I think Peter's point is that a quick-n-dirty patch is likely to make as many cases worse as it makes better. That's certainly my opinion about the topic. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: