Re: Simple join optimized badly? - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Tobias Brox
Subject Re: Simple join optimized badly?
Date
Msg-id 20061009213303.GA19144@oppetid.no
Whole thread Raw
In response to Simple join optimized badly?  ("Craig A. James" <cjames@modgraph-usa.com>)
Responses Re: Simple join optimized badly?
Re: Simple join optimized badly?
List pgsql-performance
[Jim C. Nasby - Mon at 04:18:27PM -0500]
> I can agree to that, but we'll never get any progress so long as every
> time hints are brought up the response is that they're evil and should
> never be in the database. I'll also say that a very simple hinting
> language (ie: allowing you to specify access method for a table, and
> join methods) would go a huge way towards enabling app developers to get
> stuff done now while waiting for all these magical optimizer
> improvements that have been talked about for years.

Just a comment from the side line; can't the rough "set
enable_seqscan=off" be considered as sort of a hint anyway?  There have
been situations where we've actually had to resort to such crud.

Beeing able to i.e. force a particular index is something I really
wouldn't put into the application except for as a very last resort,
_but_ beeing able to force i.e. the use of a particular index in an
interactive 'explain analyze'-query would often be ... if not outright
useful, then at least very interessting.


pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: "Jim C. Nasby"
Date:
Subject: Re: autovacuum not working?
Next
From: "Jim C. Nasby"
Date:
Subject: Re: Simple join optimized badly?