| From: | "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Bunch o' dead code in GEQO |
| Date: | 2004-01-22 16:32:21 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.33.0401220929100.25073-100000@css120.ihs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 22 Jan 2004, Tom Lane wrote:
> "scott.marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> writes:
> > On Wed, 21 Jan 2004, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> The GEQO planner module contains six different recombination algorithms,
>
> > considering the recent discussion about REALLY slow query planning by the
> > GEQO module, it might be worth testing each one to see which works best
> > before lopping them off.
>
> I'm assuming that the original author of the GEQO code already did that
> testing ...
Hmmm. I was figuring he wasn't sure so he left them in for other people
to test. Is this a part of the code that eats up much time, or something
simple and fast that isn't part of the "GEQO takes 8 seconds to plan"
problem?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-01-22 16:51:55 | Re: Bunch o' dead code in GEQO |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-01-22 16:07:27 | Re: Bunch o' dead code in GEQO |