From: | Cédric Villemain <cedric(dot)villemain(dot)debian(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Vlad Arkhipov <arhipov(at)dc(dot)baikal(dot)ru>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Optimization idea |
Date: | 2010-05-01 10:52:35 |
Message-ID: | w2he94e14cd1005010352xc91e4e72t298db4cdecb5bc59@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
2010/4/28 Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>:
> On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 5:33 AM, Cédric Villemain
> <cedric(dot)villemain(dot)debian(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> In the first query, the planner doesn't use the information of the 2,3,4.
>> It just does a : I'll bet I'll have 2 rows in t1 (I think it should
>> say 3, but it doesn't)
>> So it divide the estimated number of rows in the t2 table by 5
>> (different values) and multiply by 2 (rows) : 40040.
>
> I think it's doing something more complicated. See scalararraysel().
>
>> In the second query the planner use a different behavior : it did
>> expand the value of t1.t to t2.t for each join relation and find a
>> costless plan. (than the one using seqscan on t2)
>
> I think the problem here is one we've discussed before: if the query
> planner knows that something is true of x (like, say, x =
> ANY('{2,3,4}')) and it also knows that x = y, it doesn't infer that
> the same thing holds of y (i.e. y = ANY('{2,3,4}') unless the thing
> that is known to be true of x is that x is equal to some constant.
> Tom doesn't think it would be worth the additional CPU time that it
> would take to make these sorts of deductions. I'm not sure I believe
> that, but I haven't tried to write the code, either.
Relative to this too :
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2010-05/msg00009.php ?
>
> ...Robert
>
--
Cédric Villemain
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-05-01 11:39:09 | Re: autovacuum strategy / parameters |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2010-05-01 03:08:20 | Re: autovacuum strategy / parameters |