Re: anti-join chosen even when slower than old plan - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Kevin Grittner
Subject Re: anti-join chosen even when slower than old plan
Date
Msg-id 4CDBB0A40200002500037571@gw.wicourts.gov
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: anti-join chosen even when slower than old plan  (Mladen Gogala <mladen.gogala@vmsinfo.com>)
Responses Re: anti-join chosen even when slower than old plan
Re: anti-join chosen even when slower than old plan
List pgsql-performance
Mladen Gogala <mladen.gogala@vmsinfo.com> wrote:

> create a definitive bias toward one type of the execution plan.

We're talking about trying to support the exact opposite.  This all
started because a database which was tuned for good response time
for relatively small queries against a "hot" portion of some tables
chose a bad plan for a weekend maintenance run against the full
tables.  We're talking about the possibility of adapting the cost
factors based on table sizes as compared to available cache, to more
accurately model the impact of needing to do actual disk I/O for
such queries.

This also is very different from trying to adapt queries to what
happens to be currently in cache.  As already discussed on a recent
thread, the instability in plans and the failure to get to an
effective cache set make that a bad idea.  The idea discussed here
would maintain a stable plan for a given query, it would just help
choose a good plan based on the likely level of caching.

-Kevin

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Kenneth Marshall
Date:
Subject: Re: anti-join chosen even when slower than old plan
Next
From: Bob Lunney
Date:
Subject: Re: anti-join chosen even when slower than old plan