Re: POC: GROUP BY optimization

From: Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>
Cc: GavinFlower(at)archidevsys(dot)co(dot)nz, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Subject: Re: POC: GROUP BY optimization
Date: 2018-11-29 16:56:53
Message-ID: CA+q6zcVFEB--p=e2S-mY6UB87YCBBh=5WXdw2Gqr-2nBGtLkjg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 4:16 AM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jun 30, 2018 at 09:19:13AM +1200, Gavin Flower wrote:
> > Additionally put an upper limit threshold on the number of combinations to
> > check, fairly large by default?
> >
> > If first threshold is exceeded, could consider checking out a few more
> > selected at random from paths not yet checked, to avoid any bias caused by
> > stopping a systematic search. This might prove important when N! is fairly
> > large.
>
> Please note that the latest patch available does not apply, so this has
> been moved to next CF 2018-11, waiting for input from its author.

Unfortunately, patch still has some conflicts, could you please rebase it?

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dmitry Dolgov 2018-11-29 17:00:15 Re: WIP Patch: Precalculate stable functions, infrastructure v1
Previous Message Dmitry Dolgov 2018-11-29 16:53:31 Re: cost_sort() improvements