Re: ALTER TABLE ADD COLUMN fast default

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: ALTER TABLE ADD COLUMN fast default
Date: 2018-03-14 00:31:40
Message-ID: 20180314003140.mwbtwv5d5gprjhgb@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2018-03-14 09:06:54 +1030, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> I do suspect that the "physical tlist" optimization sometimes turns
> out not to be one. It seems perverse to be able to improve a query's
> performance by dropping a column.

Yea, it's definitely not always a boon. Especially w/ the newer v10+
project code. I suspect we should largely get rid of it in v12, which
presumably will see a storage layer abstraction...

It'll be even more worthwhile to get rid of it if we manage to avoid
deforming columns that aren't needed but are lower than the currently
required columns. I still think we should build bitmasks of required
columns during planning.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David G. Johnston 2018-03-14 00:39:37 Re: Fixes for missing schema qualifications
Previous Message David Rowley 2018-03-14 00:28:35 Re: ALTER TABLE ADD COLUMN fast default