From: | Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Reallife szenario for GEQO |
Date: | 2004-01-13 12:16:43 |
Message-ID: | 4003E1AB.2040105@oopsware.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Richard Huxton wrote:
> On Tuesday 13 January 2004 09:50, Bernd Helmle wrote:
>
>
>
> I don't think it's that it provides a better plan, just that it comes up with
> a quicker solution. Searching all possible paths is not practical for a large
> number of tables, so you need another approach.
>
Aggreed. That was my opinion, too. Sorry for my unclear statement.
> Google for "travelling salesman problem" for discussion of the sort of
> thinking behind it.
>
That was the first thing i've done. I understand the theoretical
background, but i need a practical scenario, to show:
QUERY A with GEQO
QUERY A without GEQO
And then compare the specific query plan generation efficency.
In this case I have to think about a practical database scenario, to
execute such queries. If i have enough tables i can join against, i
should see an improvement, in theory.
But what means "enough tables"?
So i wonder, if anyone had done such a comparison already.
Thanks for your reply,
Bernd
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Richard Huxton | 2004-01-13 12:28:10 | Re: insertion with trigger failed unexpectedly |
Previous Message | Anton.Nikiforov | 2004-01-13 12:01:34 | Re: Parse error help needed... |