Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Avoiding bad prepared-statement plans.

From: Yeb Havinga <yebhavinga(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Bart Samwel <bart(at)samwel(dot)tk>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeroen Vermeulen <jtv(at)xs4all(dot)nl>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Avoiding bad prepared-statement plans.
Date: 2010-02-11 13:41:02
Message-ID: 4B7408EE.5020905@gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Bart Samwel wrote:
> Perhaps this could be based on a (configurable?) ratio of observed 
> planning time and projected execution time. I mean, if planning it the 
> first time took 30 ms and projected execution time is 1 ms, then by 
> all means NEVER re-plan.
IMHO looking at ms is bad for this 'possible replan' decision. The only 
comparable numbers invariant to system load are the planners costs (not 
in ms but unitless) and maybe actual number of processed tuples, but 
never actual ms.

Regards,
Yeb Havinga


In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Dimitri FontaineDate: 2010-02-11 13:41:15
Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Make standby server continuously retry restoring the next WAL
Previous:From: Heikki LinnakangasDate: 2010-02-11 13:28:51
Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Make standby server continuously retry restoring the next WAL

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group