Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Rewrite GEQO's gimme_tree function so that it always finds a

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Rewrite GEQO's gimme_tree function so that it always finds a
Date: 2009-12-03 03:32:00
Message-ID: 28516.1259811120@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Not sure what you mean. There's already a special-case code path for
> cross joins; but I think it's probably considering a lot of silly
> paths. Is there a case where it makes sense to do cross joins at some
> stage of the process other than last?

They *are* done last, as a rule, because of the heuristic that prefers to
join where there's a join clause. (However I've gotten negative comments
about that --- some people think that when joining small detail tables
to a big fact table, it'd be better to cross-join the detail tables and
then do one multi-clause join to the big table. I'm unconvinced myself
but there does seem to be more than one school of thought about it.)

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-committers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2009-12-03 03:49:48 Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Rewrite GEQO's gimme_tree function so that it always finds a
Previous Message Robert Haas 2009-12-03 03:24:09 Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Rewrite GEQO's gimme_tree function so that it always finds a

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jose Ildefonso Camargo Tolosa 2009-12-03 03:34:43 Re: [Bacula-users] Catastrophic changes to PostgreSQL 8.4
Previous Message Craig Ringer 2009-12-03 03:28:18 Re: Catastrophic changes to PostgreSQL 8.4