On 5/3/2025 14:29, Aleksander Alekseev wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> I would like to discuss the introduction of a hook for evaluating the
>> selectivity of an expression when searching for an optimal query plan.
>> This topic has been brought up in various discussions, for example, in [1].
>>
>> [...]
>
> As I vaguely recall recent proposals like this ("Pluggable TOASTer" to
> name one) this approach was criticised. Hooks per se don't add value
> for the end user. They only put the burden of maintaining them on the
> community while all the real features are implemented in proprietar
> extensions. If you believe something is missing in Postgres,
> contribute it to the upstream so that anyone will benefit from it.
At first, I didn't find the reason for hooks' current existence in the
core. However, it's clear that hooks speed up the development of
extensions, which in turn enhances usability and popularity of the
project. This leads to a greater number of use cases and tests,
fostering community growth. I'm not sure what the purpose of the project
is except curiosity, but even then, extensions speed up the idea
validation process, don't they?
It's important to remember that not all extensions are proprietary. Does
TimescaleDB not provide value to both end users and the community?
Furthermore, extensions are necessary to address gaps that the community
may not work on by definition; for example, consider pg_hint_plan.
As I mentioned, the primary purpose of the hook is clear: to advance the
development of alternative statistics and estimation methods. For
instance, I've already come across proposals for multidimensional
histograms. Personally, I want to use this hook to implement zonal
ndistinct statistic extension to address the intra-column data skew issue.
Overall, I see that new hooks allow new [sometimes] open-source projects
and startups to emerge - not sure about enterprises' benefits.
Therefore, I'm not convinced by your current justification. Are there
any technical objections?
--
regards, Andrei Lepikhov
