Re: Proposed Query Planner TODO items

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Proposed Query Planner TODO items
Date: 2003-12-09 17:25:54
Message-ID: 200312090925.54413.josh@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom,

> In general I am suspicious of proposals to rewrite queries into UNION
> "equivalents", because the "equivalent" usually isn't exactly
> equivalent, at least not without conditions that the planner can't
> easily prove.

As I said, I'm not sure that UNIONing the query is the solution, we just need
something other than what the planner currently does, which does not
complete.

Explains later today.

--
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message D'Arcy J.M. Cain 2003-12-09 17:27:30 Re: PostgreSQL port to pure Java?
Previous Message Neil Conway 2003-12-09 17:15:51 Re: PostgreSQL port to pure Java?