Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com> wrote:
>> What about 14? Could we at least raise it to 14? 1/2 :)

> I doubt we can raise it at all without lying to ourselves about the
> likely results of so doing.  The GEQO planning times are in the low
> double digits of milliseconds.  My apps typically have a budget of at
> most ~200 ms to plan and execute the query, and I'm not always
> operating on empty tables.

The reason this is a configurable parameter is so that people can tune
it to their own needs.  I think the current default fits all right with
our usual policy of being conservative about hardware requirements.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

• Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Rewrite GEQO`s gimme_tree function so that it always finds a at 2009-12-01 18:12:18 from Robert Haas

Responses

• Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Rewrite GEQO's gimme_tree function so that it always finds a at 2009-12-02 21:52:49 from Greg Sabino Mullane

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Greg Stark	Date: 2009-12-01 19:10:07
	Subject: Re: Block-level CRC checks
Previous:	From: Aidan Van Dyk	Date: 2009-12-01 19:06:32
	Subject: Re: Block-level CRC checks

pgsql-committers by date

Next:	From: Tom Lane	Date: 2009-12-01 21:00:24
	Subject: pgsql: Teach the regular expression functions to do case-insensitive
Previous:	From: Robert Haas	Date: 2009-12-01 18:12:18
	Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Rewrite GEQO`s gimme_tree function so that it always finds a