Re: Index Tuning Features

From: "Mark Woodward" <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Index Tuning Features
Date: 2006-10-11 00:17:20
Message-ID: 22014.24.91.171.78.1160525840.squirrel@mail.mohawksoft.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:

>> - RECOMMEND command
>
>> Similar in usage to an EXPLAIN, the RECOMMEND command would return a
>> list of indexes that need to be added to get the cheapest plan for a
>> particular query (no explain plan result though).
>
> Both of these seem to assume that EXPLAIN results, without EXPLAIN
> ANALYZE results to back them up, are sufficient for tuning. I find
> this idea a bit dubious, particularly for cases of "marginal" indexes.

I think the idea of "virtual indexes" is pretty interesting, but
ultimately a lesser solution to a more fundimental issue, and that would
be "hands on" control over the planner. Estimating the effect of an index
on a query "prior" to creating the index is a great idea, how that is done
is something different than building concensus that it should be done.

Another thing that this brings up is "hints" to a query. Over the years, I
have run into situation where the planner wasn't great. It would be nice
to try forcing different strategies on the planner and see if performance
caan be improved.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jim C. Nasby 2006-10-11 01:17:28 Change view ownership
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-10-10 23:15:09 Re: Index Tuning Features