Re: should we have a fast-path planning for OLTP starjoins? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: should we have a fast-path planning for OLTP starjoins?
Date
Msg-id 3353330.1763222227@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: should we have a fast-path planning for OLTP starjoins?  (Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> writes:
> Some unsolicited advice:
> ...
> But here you can just use the order that the SQL uses.  It gives the
> author some power.

If that's the approach you want, it's been possible for decades:
"set join_collapse_limit = 1" and away you go.  I don't feel a
need to invent a different version of that for star schemas.

I do not think this patch should have ambitions beyond the stated
one of avoiding useless join-order search effort.  If you try to
load more than that onto the plate you'll probably end in failure.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Banck
Date:
Subject: Re: [Patch] Mention md5 is deprecated in postgresql.conf.sample
Next
From: Greg Sabino Mullane
Date:
Subject: Re: regarding statistics retaining with 18 Upgrade