Re: patch for geqo tweaks

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Nathan Wagner <nw+pg(at)hydaspes(dot)if(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: patch for geqo tweaks
Date: 2015-11-04 22:11:08
Message-ID: 15472.1446675068@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Having said that, though, I believe that it's also probably a
>> *different* initial shuffle, which may well mean that GEQO gives
>> different plans in some cases. That doesn't bother me as long as
>> we only make the change in HEAD, but does anyone want to complain?

> Uh, do we promise that plans found by geqo are stable? That would seem
> odd to me -- wouldn't they change shape on a whim, say because the stats
> are different? It seems odd to look for plan stability using a genetic
> algorithm.

Well, obviously any plan might change if the stats change. But we do
promise repeatable plans given identical input data, cf commit f5bc74192.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joe Conway 2015-11-04 22:13:54 Re: Request: pg_cancel_backend variant that handles 'idle in transaction' sessions
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2015-11-04 22:10:28 Re: Request: pg_cancel_backend variant that handles 'idle in transaction' sessions