Re: On disable_cost - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: On disable_cost
Date
Msg-id 3985903.1722617472@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: On disable_cost  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: On disable_cost
List pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Fri, Aug 2, 2024 at 9:13 AM David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> wrote:
>> ... That way you maintain the
>> existing behaviour of not optimising for disabled node types and don't
>> risk plan changes if the final cost comes out cheaper than the initial
>> cost.

> All three initial_cost_XXX functions have a comment that says "This
> must quickly produce lower-bound estimates of the path's startup and
> total costs," i.e. the final cost should never be cheaper. I'm pretty
> sure that it was the design intention here that no path ever gets
> rejected at the initial cost stage that would have been accepted at
> the final cost stage.

That absolutely is the expectation, and we'd better be careful not
to break it.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Rajesh Kokkonda
Date:
Subject: Re: Memory growth observed with C++ application consuming libpq.dll on Windows
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: On disable_cost