Re: Todo: Teach planner to evaluate multiple windows in the optimal order

On Tue, 14 Feb 2023 at 17:21, John Naylor <john.naylor@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> Not rechecking seems to eliminate the regression in 4 cases, and reduce it in the other 2 cases. For those 2 cases
(10e6rows, random, mod 10 and 100), it might be worthwhile to "zoom in" with more measurements, but haven't done that
yet.

Thanks for writing up this patch and for running those tests again.
I'm surprised to see there's a decent about of truth in the surplus
recheck of the first column in tiebreaks (mostly) causing the
regression. I really would have suspected CPU caching effects to be a
bigger factor. From looking at your numbers, it looks like it's just
the mod=100 test in random and unsorted. fallback-on looks faster than
master-off for random mod=10.

I didn't do a detailed review of the sort patch, but I did wonder
about the use of the name "fallback"  in the new functions. The
comment in the following snippet from qsort_tuple_unsigned_compare()
makes me think "tiebreak" is a better name.

/*
* No need to waste effort calling the tiebreak function when there are no
* other keys to sort on.
*/
if (state->base.onlyKey != NULL)
    return 0;

return state->base.comparetup_fallback(a, b, state);

I think if we fixed this duplicate recompare thing then I'd be much
more inclined to push the windowagg sort reduction stuff.

I also wonder if the weirdness I reported in [1] would also disappear
with your patch.  There's a patch on that thread that hacks up the
planner to split multi-column sorts into Sort -> Incremental Sort
rather than just a single sort.

David

[1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAApHDvpAO5H_L84kn9gCJ_hihOavtmDjimKYyftjWtF69BJ=8Q@mail.gmail.com