| From: | Andrei Lepikhov <lepihov(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Yoni Sade <yonisade83(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #18854: PostgreSQL chooses a suboptimal execution plan when using a specific WHERE filter |
| Date: | 2025-03-20 19:50:51 |
| Message-ID: | 31635fee-f260-49a4-81d3-8f684efdabd3@gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On 19/3/2025 14:34, Yoni Sade wrote:
> I would like to add that commenting out that WHERE clause doesn't work
> for all of this query variations so I've found another workaround for
> now ("LIMIT 1000000" in *bold*)
>
> to make the optimizer better estimate the cardinality of the subquery
> and change the plan to a better one:*
I wouldn't say it is the ultimate root of the problem, but using
generate_series, especially with non-constant parameters, seems harmful
for the query planning: we can't predict the number of tuples and don't
have any statistics on that set. So, your LIMIT works like a hint that
helps decide how massive a set of tuples it will generate and seems to
be the only option possible.
--
regards, Andrei Lepikhov
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | PG Bug reporting form | 2025-03-21 04:46:51 | BUG #18860: Test src/test/recovery/t/039_end_of_wal.pl is unstable |
| Previous Message | Ben Caspi | 2025-03-20 15:14:13 | PostgreSQL v15.12 fails to perform PG_UPGRADE from v13 and v9 on Windows |