From: | Xiaozhe Yao <askxzyao(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Propose a new hook for mutating the query bounds |
Date: | 2021-11-17 15:39:37 |
Message-ID: | CAAxqZp_NH+aHQ6hO2PwrJSZb=9arPZDt5fueTrHiXASCh0623A@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Tom,
Thanks for your feedback. I completely agree with you that a higher-level
hook is better suited for this case. I have adjusted the PoC patch to this
email.
Now it is located in the clauselist_selectivity_ext function, where we
first check if the hook is defined. If so, we let the hook estimate the
selectivity and return the result. With this one, I can also develop
extensions to better estimate the selectivity.
I hope it makes more sense. Also please forgive me if I am understanding
Postgres somehow wrong, as I am quite new to this community :)
Best regards,
Xiaozhe
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
clauselist_selectivity_hook.diff | text/x-patch | 1.8 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Mark Dilger | 2021-11-17 15:44:27 | Re: Non-superuser subscription owners |
Previous Message | Dmitry Dolgov | 2021-11-17 15:21:44 | Re: Keep notnullattrs in RelOptInfo (Was part of UniqueKey patch series) |