Re: plan time of MASSIVE partitioning ...
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: plan time of MASSIVE partitioning ... |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AANLkTimu6qcEyZQE6YHF6-1Hgg_t_wbUf6AxjpuZe0qF@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: plan time of MASSIVE partitioning ... (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 10:55 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes: >> FYI, I always wondered if the rare use of mergejoins justified the extra >> planning time of carrying around all those joinpaths. > > They're hardly rare. They fairly rare in the sorts of queries I normally issue, but I'd quibble with the statement on other grounds: IME, we generate far more nest loops paths than anything else. The comment in match_unsorted_outer() says it all: * We always generate a nestloop path for each available outer path.* In fact we may generate as many as five: one on thecheapest-total-cost* inner path, one on the same with materialization, one on the* cheapest-startup-cost inner path (ifdifferent), one on the* cheapest-total inner-indexscan path (if any), and one on the* cheapest-startup inner-indexscanpath (if different). -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: