| From: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Bucky Jordan <bjordan(at)lumeta(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [PERFORM] Hints proposal |
| Date: | 2006-10-13 17:43:57 |
| Message-ID: | 20061013174357.GO15009@fetter.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 12:30:24PM -0500, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 10:23:31AM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> > Right. And I think the sane ideas are along the lines of estimate
> > & cost corrections (like Tom is saying).
>
> Let me ask this... how long do you (and others) want to wait for
> those?
That's a good question, but see below.
> It's great that the planner is continually improving, but it
> also appears that there's still a long road ahead. Having a
> dune-buggy to get to your destination ahead of the road might not be
> a bad idea... :)
What evidence do you have that adding per-query hints would take less
time and be less work, even in the short term, than the current
strategy of continuously improving the planner and optimizer?
Cheers,
D
--
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666
Skype: davidfetter
Remember to vote!
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2006-10-13 17:44:41 | Re: [PERFORM] Hints proposal |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-10-13 17:35:51 | Re: more anti-postgresql FUD |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2006-10-13 17:44:41 | Re: [PERFORM] Hints proposal |
| Previous Message | Bucky Jordan | 2006-10-13 17:33:43 | Re: [HACKERS] Hints proposal |