From: | Andrei Lepikhov <a(dot)lepikhov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
---|---|
To: | Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Subject: | Re: Propagate pathkeys from CTEs up to the outer query |
Date: | 2024-02-14 06:18:02 |
Message-ID: | fca8fe78-c67a-48ac-9164-60138e122f6c@postgrespro.ru |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 29/1/2024 10:18, Richard Guo wrote:
> In [1] we've reached a conclusion that for a MATERIALIZED CTE it's okay
> to 'allow our statistics or guesses for the sub-query to subsequently
> influence what the upper planner does'. Commit f7816aec23 exposes
> column statistics to the upper planner. In the light of that, here is a
> patch that exposes info about the ordering of the CTE result to the
> upper planner.
>
> This patch was initially posted in that same thread and has received
> some comments from Tom in [2]. Due to the presence of multiple patches
> in that thread, it has led to confusion. So fork a new thread here
> specifically dedicated to discussing the patch about exposing pathkeys
> from CTEs to the upper planner.
I like this approach. It looks good initially, but such features need
more opinions/views/time to analyse corner cases.
It goes alongside my current backburner - pull parameterisation through
the GROUP-BY and the query block fence up to the JOIN searching code of
the parent query.
--
regards,
Andrei Lepikhov
Postgres Professional
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | torikoshia | 2024-02-14 06:29:35 | Re: RFC: Logging plan of the running query |
Previous Message | Ian Lawrence Barwick | 2024-02-14 05:22:10 | Re: Allow passing extra options to initdb for tests |