Re: Closing some 8.4 open items

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Closing some 8.4 open items
Date: 2009-04-08 16:17:25
Message-ID: 603c8f070904080917p6c2eaee4wf35c1bf89d709e7d@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 11:59 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 10:33 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> The main point is that the planner will prefer a bitmap scan for any
>>> query that's estimated to return more than quite a small number of rows.
>
>> That makes sense, but what about the nestloop-over-inner-indexscan case?
>
> What about it?  The provided patch made no attempt to optimize that
> case.
>
> Doing so might well be interesting, but it's not getting done for 8.4.
> I think it would be quite an invasive patch --- it's hard to see how to
> do it without explicit support at the nestloop join level, so that you
> could pipeline the processing of multiple key values coming from the outer
> side of the join.

OK, I think I'm now understanding your line of thinking. Thanks for
the explanation.

...Robert

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2009-04-08 16:40:53 Re: Closing some 8.4 open items
Previous Message Dave Page 2009-04-08 16:05:54 Re: plpgsql debugger (pldbg) absent from 8.4?