From: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Mark Woodward <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>, josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Jaime Casanova <systemguards(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Hints WAS: Index Tuning Features |
Date: | 2006-10-12 13:06:35 |
Message-ID: | 20061012130635.GG11723@svana.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 08:50:04AM -0400, Greg Stark wrote:
> Not to say this isn't a good idea -- i think it's a great idea. But note that
> it doesn't solve some of the use cases of hints. Consider something like:
>
> WHERE NOT radius_authenticate(suspected_hacker)
>
> or
>
> WHERE NOT verify_pk_signature(document_we_have_no_reason_to_doubt)
We currently construct histograms for data in columns, there's no
particular reason why we can't do the same for functions. In a similar
vein, I don't see a reason why you couldn't enable a stats-gathering
mode where function calls would be instrumented to collect information
about:
- time of execution
- distribution of outputs
Which could then be used by the planner. Or more directly:
CREATE HISTOGRAM FOR FUNCTION verify_pk_signature(documenent)
AS ( true = 99, false = 1 );
(Perhaps DECLARE is the better phrase?).
Have a nice day,
--
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> http://svana.org/kleptog/
> From each according to his ability. To each according to his ability to litigate.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Merlin Moncure | 2006-10-12 13:17:15 | Re: [HACKERS] Database Auditing |
Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2006-10-12 12:50:04 | Re: Hints WAS: Index Tuning Features |