Re: More efficient RI checks - take 2
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: More efficient RI checks - take 2 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+Tgmobb2_sm8PZ16_dqevUktcjT8OnZ5xvv=AFtxWWjf28VxA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: More efficient RI checks - take 2 (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>) |
Ответы |
Re: More efficient RI checks - take 2
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 2:36 PM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote: > > If it's any consolation, I had the same idea very recently while > > chatting with Amit Langote. Maybe it's a bad idea, but you're not the > > only one who had it. :-) > > That seems extremely hard, given our current infrastructure. I think > there's actually a good case to be made for the idea in the abstract, > but ... The amount of logic the ExecInit* routines have is substantial, > the state they set up ss complicates. A lot of nodes have state that is > private to their .c files. All executor nodes reference the > corresponding Plan nodes, so you also need to mock up those. Right -- the idea I was talking about was to create a Plan tree without using the main planner. So it wouldn't bother costing an index scan on each index, and a sequential scan, on the target table - it would just make an index scan plan, or maybe an index path that it would then convert to an index plan. Or something like that. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: