Re: left-deep plans?

From: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: left-deep plans?
Date: 2005-02-22 06:40:40
Message-ID: 421AD3E8.7050403@samurai.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> Yes, and it's been rejected. The notion is obviously bogus; it amounts
> to assuming that every database is a star schema with only one core table.

Interesting; yes, I suppose that's true.

> Once we get into GEQO territory, we are using the left-deep-only
> heuristic because that's the only kind of plan GEQO can construct.
> But at that point you've already given up any notion of exhaustive
> search.

I think most applications would prefer an exhaustive, deterministic
search of a subset of the search space over a non-exhaustive,
non-deterministic search of the same subset, given approximately the
same performance. In other words, if confining the search to left-deep
plans allows people to use the normal planner in situations where they
would normally be forced to use GEQO to get acceptable performance, I
think that would be a win.

Speaking of which, why does GEQO restrict its search to left-deep plans
only?

-Neil

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2005-02-22 07:07:09 Re: left-deep plans?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2005-02-22 06:04:20 Re: left-deep plans?