Re: Patch for removng unused targets

From: "Etsuro Fujita" <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: "'Tom Lane'" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "'Alvaro Herrera'" <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "'Hitoshi Harada'" <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com>, "'Alexander Korotkov'" <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com>, "'pgsql-hackers'" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Patch for removng unused targets
Date: 2013-08-05 04:58:55
Message-ID: 007101ce9198$7ca4e180$75eea480$@lab.ntt.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us]

> Having said all that, there is one situation where this type of approach might
> still be useful even after such a fix, and that's KNNGist-style
> queries:
>
> select a,b,c from t order by col <-> constant limit 10;
>
> In a KNNGist search, there's no provision for the index AM to return the
actual
> value of the ORDER BY expression, and in fact it's theoretically possible that
> that value is never even explicitly computed inside the index AM. So we
couldn't
> suppress the useless evaluation of <-> by dint of requiring the physical scan
> to return that value as a Var.
>
> Reading between the lines of the original submission at
> <CAPpHfdtG5qoHoD+w=Tz3wC3fZ=b8i21=V5xandBFM=DTo-Yg=Q(at)mail(dot)gmail(dot)com>,
> I gather that it's the KNNGist-style case that worries you, so maybe it's
worth
> applying this type of patch anyway. I'd want to rejigger it to be aware of
> the cost implications though, at least for grouping_planner's choices.

+1 for improving KNNGist-style queries.

Sorry for the late response.

Thanks,

Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Gibheer 2013-08-05 05:20:49 Re: Patch for reserved connections for replication users
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2013-08-05 03:41:24 Re: [9.4 CF 1]Commitfest ... over!