| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Simon Riggs <simon(dot)riggs(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Jakub Wartak <jakub(dot)wartak(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Damage control for planner's get_actual_variable_endpoint() runaway |
| Date: | 2022-11-21 23:17:52 |
| Message-ID: | 3348462.1669072672@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 5:15 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> I think we should content ourselves with improving the demonstrated
>> case, which is where we're forced to do a lot of heap fetches due
>> to lots of not-all-visible tuples.
> All right. I've been bitten by this problem enough that I'm a little
> gun-shy about accepting anything that doesn't feel like a 100%
> solution, but I admit that the scenario I described does seem a little
> bit far-fetched.
> I won't be completely shocked if somebody finds a way to hit it, though.
Well, if we see a case where the time is indeed spent completely
within the index AM, then we'll have to do something more or less
like what Simon sketched. But I don't want to go there without
evidence that it's a live problem. API warts are really hard to
get rid of once instituted.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2022-11-21 23:34:24 | Re: Damage control for planner's get_actual_variable_endpoint() runaway |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2022-11-21 23:15:03 | Re: ubsan |