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
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 |