Re: [HACKERS] Optimizer speed and GEQO (was: nested loops in joins)

From: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us (Tom Lane)
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Optimizer speed and GEQO (was: nested loops in joins)
Date: 1999-02-06 12:49:03
Message-ID: 199902061249.HAA26117@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> I have been looking at optimizer runtime using Charles Hornberger's
> example case, and what I find is that the number of tables involved in
> the query is a very inadequate predictor of the optimizer's runtime.
> Thus, it's not surprising that we are getting poor results from using
> number of tables as the GEQO threshold measure.

OK, now I have a specific optimizer question. I looked at all
references to RelOptInfo.pathlist, and though it gets very long and hard
to check for uniqueness, the only thing I see it is used for it to find
the cheapest path.

Why are we maintaining this huge Path List for every RelOptInfo
structure if we only need the cheapest? Why not store only the cheapest
plan, instead of generating all unique plans, then using only the
cheapest?

--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas G. Lockhart 1999-02-06 14:21:40 Re: [HACKERS] Optimizer speed and GEQO (was: nested loops in joins)
Previous Message Hannu Krosing 1999-02-06 12:37:43 Re: [HACKERS] Problems with >2GB tables on Linux 2.0