Re: Out of date comment in cached_plan_cost

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Out of date comment in cached_plan_cost
Date: 2017-12-08 17:05:52
Message-ID: CA+TgmoaTO-3cbZubasG86o2AooDSqs0iyagQqbUFzxbQFxDrYg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 3:14 AM, David Rowley
<david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> I just noticed a comment which has been made a little outdated by the
> partition-wise join code from commit f49842d1. The comment claims that
> inheritance children don't add to the effort required in join
> planning, while that still may be true, we should probably mention
> that partitioned tables may be a more complex case.
>
> The attached is my attempt at putting this right.

I don't feel entirely right about the way this seems to treat
inheritance and partitioning as two entirely separate features; that's
true from a user perspective, more or less, but not internally to the
code.

Of course, this also begs the question of whether we ought to be
changing the formula somehow.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mark Dilger 2017-12-08 17:15:52 Re: Speeding up pg_upgrade
Previous Message Robert Haas 2017-12-08 17:00:24 Re: [HACKERS] Moving relation extension locks out of heavyweight lock manager