Re: Optimizer hook

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Julius Stroffek <Julius(dot)Stroffek(at)Sun(dot)COM>
Cc: pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Optimizer hook
Date: 2007-09-25 22:49:30
Message-ID: 8067.1190760570@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

Julius Stroffek <Julius(dot)Stroffek(at)Sun(dot)COM> writes:
> Parts of the result path might be found by geqo and parts of it by
> regular algorithm.

Why would you care? Seems like forcing that to not happen is actively
making it stupider.

> If there is no way of how to make the code work then it makes no sense
> to put the hook to the place I am proposing. It works for me, but I have
> not tested that very well yet. If I would swap calls to geqo
> and make_one_rel_by_joins it will not work. Therefore there might be
> an issue I do not know about yet.

Well, I can see one likely problem: list_copy is a shallow copy and
thus doesn't ensure that the second set of functions sees the same input
data structures as the first. I know that geqo has to go through some
special pushups to perform multiple invocations of the base planner,
and I suspect you need that here too. Look at geqo_eval().

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jaime Casanova 2007-09-25 23:08:33 Re: [HACKERS] 'Waiting on lock'
Previous Message Julius Stroffek 2007-09-25 22:18:39 Re: Optimizer hook