Re: Use merge-based matching for MCVs in eqjoinsel

From: Ilia Evdokimov <ilya(dot)evdokimov(at)tantorlabs(dot)com>
To: David Geier <geidav(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Use merge-based matching for MCVs in eqjoinsel
Date: 2025-10-30 10:07:22
Message-ID: bb65fa03-fc84-48b9-b610-702034a435f4@tantorlabs.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi David,

On 27.10.2025 18:50, David Geier wrote:
> Hi Ilia!
>
> On 10.09.2025 15:56, Ilia Evdokimov wrote:
>> LGTM. Yes, I'll test this patch.
>>
>>
>>
>> Unfortunately, the JOB benchmark does not contain semi join nodes.
>> However, TPC-DS does. I'll look for the queries with slowest planner
>> times there and check them.
>>
>> I'll need some time to check both join and semi join cases with small
>> and large default_statistics_target. I'll share the results later.
>>
> Have you had a chance to test above things?

Yes, I wrote about this here:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/c3dbf2ab-d72d-4033-822a-60ad8023f499%40tantorlabs.com

--
Best regards,
Ilia Evdokimov,
Tantor Labs LLC,
https://tantorlabs.com/

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jakub Wartak 2025-10-30 10:14:07 Re: [PING] fallocate() causes btrfs to never compress postgresql files
Previous Message Jakub Wartak 2025-10-30 09:52:34 Re: [PATCH] Add Windows support for backtrace_functions (MSVC only)