Re: [PATCH] Incremental sort (was: PoC: Partial sort)

On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 01:50:30PM -0400, James Coleman wrote:
>On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 5:55 PM Tomas Vondra
><tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> The "patched" column means all developer GUCs disabled, so it's expected
>> to produce the same plan as master (and it is). And then there's one
>> column for each developer GUC. If the column is just TRUE it means the
>> GUC does not affect any of the synthetic queries. There are 4 of them:
>>
>> - devel_add_paths_to_grouping_rel_parallel
>> - devel_create_partial_grouping_paths
>> - devel_gather_grouping_paths
>> - devel_standard_join_search
>>
>> The places controlled by those GUCs are either useless, or the query
>> affected by them is not included in the list of queries.
>
>I'd previously found (in my reverse engineering efforts) the query:
>
>select *
>from tenk1 t1
>join tenk1 t2 on t1.hundred = t2.hundred
>join tenk1 t3 on t1.hundred = t3.hundred
>order by t1.hundred, t1.twenty
>limit 50;
>
>can change plans to use incremental sort when
>generate_useful_gather_paths() is added to standard_join_search().
>Specifically, we get a merge join between t1 and t3 as the top level
>(besides limit) node where the driving side of the join is a gather
>merge with incremental sort. This does rely on these gucs set in the
>test harness:
>
>set local max_parallel_workers_per_gather=4;
>set local min_parallel_table_scan_size=0;
>set local parallel_tuple_cost=0;
>set local parallel_setup_cost=0;
>
>So I think we can reduce the number of unused gucs to 3.
>

OK. I'll try extending the set of synthetic queries in [1] to also do
soemthing like this and generate similar plans.

regards

--
Tomas Vondra http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services