Re: [HACKERS] Big IN() clauses etc : feature proposal

From: Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>
To: PFC <lists(at)peufeu(dot)com>
Cc: Markus Schaber <schabi(at)logix-tt(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Big IN() clauses etc : feature proposal
Date: 2006-05-10 14:55:51
Message-ID: 20060510145551.GB14476@svana.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance

On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 04:38:31PM +0200, PFC wrote:
> You need to do some processing to know how many rows the function
> would return.
> Often, this processing will be repeated in the function itself.
> Sometimes it's very simple (ie. the function will RETURN NEXT each
> element in an array, you know the array length...)
> Sometimes, for functions returning few rows, it might be faster to
> compute the entire result set in the cost estimator.

I think the best would probably be to assign a constant. An SRF will
generally return between one of 1-10, 10-100, 100-1000, etc. You don't
need exact number, you just need to get within an order of magnitude
and a constant will work fine for that.

How many functions sometimes return one and sometimes a million rows?

Have a nice day,
--
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> http://svana.org/kleptog/
> From each according to his ability. To each according to his ability to litigate.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Markus Schaber 2006-05-10 15:04:25 Re: [HACKERS] Big IN() clauses etc : feature proposal
Previous Message PFC 2006-05-10 14:38:31 Re: [HACKERS] Big IN() clauses etc : feature proposal

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Markus Schaber 2006-05-10 14:57:45 Re: [PERFORM] Arguments Pro/Contra Software Raid
Previous Message Douglas McNaught 2006-05-10 14:51:22 Re: [PERFORM] Arguments Pro/Contra Software Raid