From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Gregory Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
Cc: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, AgentM <agentm(at)themactionfaction(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: An Idea for planner hints |
Date: | 2006-08-17 08:55:27 |
Message-ID: | 200608171055.28899.peter_e@gmx.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Gregory Stark wrote:
> I'm not sure it's worth throwing out the more user-friendly interface
> we have now but I think it's clear that a table is the obvious
> "machine-readable format" if you're already sitting in an SQL
> database... :)
Then again, a table might not be the optimal format for an inherently
hierarchical structure.
But we're getting ahead of ourselves. There are three parts to this:
1. determine what statistics to gather
2. gather those statistics
3. use those statistics
#1 can really be handled manually in the beginning, and you'd still have
an excessively useful system if #2 and #3 are available. Once that is
done, we can gain experience with the system and maybe find a way to
automate #1, but it really does not need to be the first step.
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stefan Kaltenbrunner | 2006-08-17 08:59:24 | Re: Going for "all green" buildfarm results |
Previous Message | Markus Schiltknecht | 2006-08-17 07:51:07 | news server does not respond |