From: | Atri Sharma <atri(dot)jiit(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | David Johnston <polobo(at)yahoo(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Planner hints in Postgresql |
Date: | 2014-03-17 17:49:03 |
Message-ID: | CAOeZVieod1S4C42r8Zq3341j=AxhSYDagO1P=sbqBUeEfyMoVQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 10:54 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Atri Sharma <atri(dot)jiit(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 9:45 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> >> Possibly worth noting is that in past discussions, we've concluded that
> >> the most sensible type of hint would not be "use this plan" at all, but
> >> "here's what to assume about the selectivity of this WHERE clause".
> >> That seems considerably less likely to break than any attempt to
> directly
> >> specify plan details.
>
> > Isnt using a user given value for selectivity a pretty risky situation as
> > it can horribly screw up the plan selection?
>
> And forcing a plan to be used *isn't* that? Please re-read the older
> threads, since you evidently have not.
>
>
I never said that we force a plan to be used. I just said that we should
increase the preference for a user given plan and not interfere in the cost
estimation of the other potential plans and the evaluation of the final
selected plan.
Regards,
Atri
--
Regards,
Atri
*l'apprenant*
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Merlin Moncure | 2014-03-17 17:49:25 | Re: Planner hints in Postgresql |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2014-03-17 17:48:13 | Re: jsonb status |