Re: WIP patch for parameterized inner paths

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: WIP patch for parameterized inner paths
Date: 2012-01-26 19:27:40
Message-ID: 17648.1327606060@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>>> Is there a guard in here against joining a parameterized path to an
>>> intermediate relation when no SJ is involved? In other words, if
>>> we're joining a parameterized path on A to a path on B, then either
>>> the join to B should satisfy at least part of the parameterization
>>> needed by A, or there should be a special join with A and B on one
>>> side and a relation that satisfies at least part of the
>>> parameterization of A on the other.

I've implemented this idea, recast a bit to prevent generating a
parameterized join path in the first place unless it depends on a
parameter from a relation for which there's a join ordering constraint
still outstanding. It seems to get us to where the planning time
penalty is only about 10%, which frankly is probably less than sampling
error considering the small set of test cases I'm looking at.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2012-01-26 19:37:23 Re: BGWriter latch, power saving
Previous Message Robert Haas 2012-01-26 19:15:00 Re: [v9.2] Add GUC sepgsql.client_label