| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Nico Williams <nico(at)cryptonector(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(at)vondra(dot)me>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: should we have a fast-path planning for OLTP starjoins? |
| Date: | 2025-11-15 15:57:07 |
| Message-ID: | 3353330.1763222227@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Nico Williams <nico(at)cryptonector(dot)com> writes:
> Some unsolicited advice:
> ...
> But here you can just use the order that the SQL uses. It gives the
> author some power.
If that's the approach you want, it's been possible for decades:
"set join_collapse_limit = 1" and away you go. I don't feel a
need to invent a different version of that for star schemas.
I do not think this patch should have ambitions beyond the stated
one of avoiding useless join-order search effort. If you try to
load more than that onto the plate you'll probably end in failure.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Greg Sabino Mullane | 2025-11-15 16:02:23 | Re: regarding statistics retaining with 18 Upgrade |
| Previous Message | Michael Banck | 2025-11-15 14:55:39 | Re: [Patch] Mention md5 is deprecated in postgresql.conf.sample |