From: | Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Apply the "LIMIT 1" optimization to partial DISTINCT |
Date: | 2024-01-31 07:12:26 |
Message-ID: | CAMbWs49VLFhWcx7i2L2XPypDD=BmTiPZvYe+SxAvyg+gVGQ4wQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 12:26 PM David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Jan 2024 at 21:14, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > However, having said that. Parallel plans are often picked when there
> > is some highly selective qual as parallel_tuple_cost has to be applied
> > to fewer tuples for such plans, so probably this is worth doing.
>
> I was messing around with your test case and didn't manage to get any
> plan that had any rows to use the partial path with the LIMIT. I
> ended up dropping the test that was checking the results were empty as
> I didn't think it added much more value over the EXPLAIN output.
>
> I pushed the result.
Thanks for pushing it!
Thanks
Richard
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) | 2024-01-31 07:23:19 | RE: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby |
Previous Message | Richard Guo | 2024-01-31 07:11:16 | Re: Some revises in adding sorting path |