Re: surprisingly expensive join planning query

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: surprisingly expensive join planning query
Date: 2019-12-01 19:17:15
Message-ID: 3228.1575227835@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On Sun, Dec 01, 2019 at 01:27:04PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Alternatively, it'd be possible to get rid of the separate List
>> altogether, and just add the rinfo's to "mergeclauses" immediately.
>> The functionality of the separate list could be replaced by a
>> bool variable remembering whether we found any matches in this
>> pass through the loop. I think the code would be a little less
>> clear that way, but this report makes it clear that it's a
>> performance bottleneck, so maybe we should just change it.

> Yes, that might be an option. And it works even on 9.5 for me (per the
> attached patch). I don't think it's much less clear compared to just
> doing an explicit free at the end.

LGTM.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2019-12-01 19:38:36 Re: Bogus EXPLAIN results with column aliases for mismatched partitions
Previous Message Tomas Vondra 2019-12-01 19:08:58 Re: Using multiple extended statistics for estimates