| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Cc: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Hans-Jürgen Schönig <postgres(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
| Subject: | Re: Mini improvement: statement_cost_limit |
| Date: | 2008-08-04 20:53:59 |
| Message-ID: | 200808041354.01115.josh@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Greg,
> For such an application this would be a major foot-gun which would give
> a false sense of security simultaneously causing random outages and not
> providing even the protection you're counting on.
Hmmm. That sounds like a call for some testing. While our cost estimation
has some issues, I don't think it's unreliable as all that. And it's easy
enough to document the limitations. If it's 80% accurate, then it's
fixing more problems than it causes. If it's 30% accurate, then obviously
it's a bad idea.
Personally, I don't see much use for this interactively, because an
experienced DBA can easily enough run an EXPLAIN before running the query.
I usually do, on production systems.
--
--Josh
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL
San Francisco
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2008-08-04 21:08:36 | Automatic Client Failover |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2008-08-04 20:49:43 | Re: Mini improvement: statement_cost_limit |