Re: setting for maximum acceptable plan cost?

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: "Jeffrey W(dot) Baker" <jwbaker(at)acm(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: setting for maximum acceptable plan cost?
Date: 2007-11-02 21:45:00
Message-ID: 20071102144500.5f543602@scratch
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 13:49:27 -0700
"Jeffrey W. Baker" <jwbaker(at)acm(dot)org> wrote:

> Nested Loop Left Join (cost=13920.16..2257575559347.46
> rows=3691992705807 width=128)
>
> After a call to ANALYZE, the same query gave me:
>
> Merge Left Join (cost=16382.02..16853.87 rows=126768 width=59)
>
> And runs in 5 seconds. If I had been able to tell pg to reject any
> plan with cost over, say 10E9, that would have saved my server from
> half an hour of nested sequential scans.

I am confused as to why you would want to do that... seems like a
band aid for lack of maintenance.

>
> Should I just use statement_timeout as a proxy for this?
>

That would yes but see my point about maintenance above.

Joshua D. Drake

- --

=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/
UNIQUE NOT NULL
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHK5peATb/zqfZUUQRAttyAJ9pHjQUuyY7e2cJXtkB2239vOqAxACfX2XW
AHVlhc4g/mzc7uesWpAGls0=
=i6n+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2007-11-02 21:47:57 Re: setting for maximum acceptable plan cost?
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2007-11-02 21:00:58 Re: AutoVacuum Behaviour Question