Re: neqjoinsel versus "refresh materialized view concurrently"
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: neqjoinsel versus "refresh materialized view concurrently" |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 9724.1520983778@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: neqjoinsel versus "refresh materialized view concurrently" (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: neqjoinsel versus "refresh materialized view concurrently"
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com> writes: > There is a fundamental and complicated estimation problem lurking here > of course and I'm not sure what to think about that yet. Maybe there > is a very simple fix for this particular problem: Ah, I see you thought of the same hack I did. I think this may actually be a good fix, and here's the reason: this plan is in fact being driven entirely off planner default estimates, because we don't have any estimation code that knows what to do with "wholerowvar *= wholerowvar". I'm suspicious that we could drop the preceding ANALYZE as being a waste of cycles, except maybe it's finding out the number of rows for us. In any case, LIMIT 1 is only a good idea to the extent that the planner knows what it's doing, and this is an example where it demonstrably doesn't and won't any time soon. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: