From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: allowing extensions to control planner behavior |
Date: | 2024-08-30 17:42:52 |
Message-ID: | 56ebc7c4032e689d39f89dd169665d28edec33da.camel@j-davis.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 2024-08-30 at 07:33 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> This is a fair point. I dislike the fact that add_path() is a thicket
> of if-statements that's actually quite hard to understand and easy to
> screw up when you're making modifications. But I feel like it would
> be
> difficult to generalize the infrastructure without making it
> substantially slower, which would probably cause too much of an
> increase in planning time to be acceptable. So my guess is that this
> is a dead end, unless there's a clever idea that I'm not seeing.
As far as performance goes, I'm only looking at branch in add_path()
that calls compare_pathkeys(). Do you have some example queries which
would be a worst case for that path?
In general if you can post some details about how you are measuring,
that would be helpful.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jacob Champion | 2024-08-30 18:35:53 | Re: PG_TEST_EXTRA and meson |
Previous Message | Paul Jungwirth | 2024-08-30 16:26:56 | Re: Inline non-SQL SRFs using SupportRequestSimplify |