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.
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 |
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 |