Re: On disable_cost - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: On disable_cost
Date
Msg-id 1824441.1710278289@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: On disable_cost  (David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> writes:
> So maybe the fix could be to set disable_cost to something like
> 1.0e110 and adjust compare_path_costs_fuzzily to not apply the
> fuzz_factor for paths >= disable_cost.   However, I wonder if that
> risks the costs going infinite after a couple of cartesian joins.

Perhaps.  It still does nothing for Robert's point that once we're
forced into using a "disabled" plan type, it'd be better if the
disabled-ness didn't skew subsequent planning choices.

On the whole I agree that getting rid of disable_cost entirely
would be the way to go, if we can replace that with a separate
boolean without driving up the cost of add_path too much.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Nathan Bossart
Date:
Subject: Re: un-revert the MAINTAIN privilege and the pg_maintain predefined role
Next
From: Thomas Munro
Date:
Subject: Re: Vectored I/O in bulk_write.c