Re: Why is DEFAULT_FDW_TUPLE_COST so insanely low?

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Why is DEFAULT_FDW_TUPLE_COST so insanely low?
Date: 2023-10-30 14:01:14
Message-ID: ZT-3KgndQLQ_bnFy@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 02:22:08PM +1300, David Rowley wrote:
> If I change STD_FUZZ_FACTOR to something like 1.0000001 then the plans
> no longer change when I do:
>
> alter server loopback options (add fdw_tuple_cost '0.01');
> <run the query>
> alter server loopback options (drop fdw_tuple_cost);
> <run the query>
>
> Ordinarily, I'd not care too much about that, but I did test the
> performance of one of the plans and the new plan came out slower than
> the old one.
>
> I'm not exactly sure how best to proceed on this in the absence of any feedback.

I think you just go and change it. Your number is better than what we
have, and if someone wants to suggest a better number, we can change it
later.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com

Only you can decide what is important to you.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alexander Korotkov 2023-10-30 14:06:41 Re: POC, WIP: OR-clause support for indexes
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2023-10-30 13:58:20 Re: COPY TO (FREEZE)?