Re: Teaching planner to short-circuit empty UNION/EXCEPT/INTERSECT inputs
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Teaching planner to short-circuit empty UNION/EXCEPT/INTERSECT inputs |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 976130.1759375308@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Teaching planner to short-circuit empty UNION/EXCEPT/INTERSECT inputs (David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Teaching planner to short-circuit empty UNION/EXCEPT/INTERSECT inputs
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> writes: > In [1] there was a report that set operations didn't correctly detect > when inputs were provably empty sets. While this is not the bug that > the report claimed it to be, as it's just a missing optimisation, I > did decide to look at it to check if there was much performance to > gain from doing this. I'm kind of resistant to the amount of code this patch adds in comparison to the likely benefit. Sure, a badly written query can profit, but is it worth debugging and maintaining a couple hundred lines of code for that? The first few hunks of changes seem fine by this light, but I think you're expending too much effort on the EXCEPT-with-dummy-inputs cases. I'm wondering if it could be shortened a great deal by handling left-input-dummy and EXCEPT-ALL-with-right-input-dummy but leaving the EXCEPT-with-right-input-dummy case unimproved. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: