Re: [PERFORM] Proposal: relaxing link between explicit JOINs and execution order

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org, pgsql-performance(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Proposal: relaxing link between explicit JOINs and execution order
Date: 2003-01-23 00:21:24
Message-ID: 25650.1043281284@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance

Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
> I am very strongly in favor of this idea. I would personally prefer it if
> the Join collapsing parmeter could be set at query time through a SET
> statement, but will of course defer to the difficulty level in doing so.

I guess I failed to make it clear that that's what I meant. GUC
variables are those things that you can set via SET, or in the
postgresql.conf file, etc. These values would be just as manipulable
as, say, ENABLE_SEQSCAN.

> How about:
> EXPLICIT_JOIN_MINIMUM
> and
> FROM_COLLAPSE_LIMIT

> Just to make the two params not sound so identical?

Hmm. The two parameters would have closely related functions, so I'd
sort of think that the names *should* be pretty similar.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dann Corbit 2003-01-23 00:22:51 Re: Terrible performance on wide selects
Previous Message Dann Corbit 2003-01-23 00:21:18 Re: Terrible performance on wide selects

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dann Corbit 2003-01-23 00:22:51 Re: Terrible performance on wide selects
Previous Message Dann Corbit 2003-01-23 00:21:18 Re: Terrible performance on wide selects