Re: fix cost subqueryscan wrong parallel cost

From: "bucoo" <bucoo(at)sohu(dot)com>
To: "'Robert Haas'" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "'Richard Guo'" <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com>, "'pgsql-hackers'" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: fix cost subqueryscan wrong parallel cost
Date: 2022-04-22 03:35:43
Message-ID: 058201d855fa$0ca3dc80$25eb9580$@sohu.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> > > Suppose parallelism is not in use and that param_info is NULL. Then,
> > > is path->subpath->rows guaranteed to be equal to baserel->rows? If
> > > yes, then we don't need to a three-part if statement as you propose
> > > here and can just change the "else" clause to say path->path.rows =
> > > path->subpath->rows. If no, then your change gives the wrong answer.
> >
> > I checked some regress test, Sometimes subquery scan have filter,
> > so path->subpath->row guaranteed *not* to be equal to baserel->rows.
> > If the first patch is false, I don't known how to fix this,
> > looks like need someone's help.
>
> Please fix your mailer so that it doesn't send me a bounce message
> every time I reply to one of your messages on list.

This message send using Outlook.

> I don't know how to fix this right now either, then; maybe I or
> someone else will have a good idea later.

I don't known too.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Smith 2022-04-22 04:12:17 Re: Perform streaming logical transactions by background workers and parallel apply
Previous Message Tom Lane 2022-04-22 03:21:43 Re: Replace open mode with PG_BINARY_R/W/A macros