Re: postgres_fdw: estimate_path_cost_size fails to re-use cachedcosts - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Etsuro Fujita
Subject Re: postgres_fdw: estimate_path_cost_size fails to re-use cachedcosts
Date
Msg-id 5C4EDB7C.2020406@lab.ntt.co.jp
Whole thread Raw
In response to postgres_fdw: estimate_path_cost_size fails to re-use cached costs  (Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
Responses Re: postgres_fdw: estimate_path_cost_size fails to re-use cachedcosts  (Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
List pgsql-hackers
(2019/01/25 20:33), Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> I noticed yet another thing while updating the patch for pushing down
> ORDER BY LIMIT.  Let me explain.  When costing foreign paths on the
> basis of local statistics, we calculate/cache the costs of an unsorted
> foreign path, and re-use them to estimate the costs of presorted foreign
> paths, as shown below.  BUT: we fail to re-use them for some typical
> queries, such as "select * from ft1 order by a", due to
> fpinfo->rel_startup_cost=0, leading to doing the same cost calculation
> repeatedly.
> 
>          /*
>           * We will come here again and again with different set of pathkeys
>           * that caller wants to cost. We don't need to calculate the cost of
>           * bare scan each time. Instead, use the costs if we have cached
> them
>           * already.
>           */
>          if (fpinfo->rel_startup_cost>  0&&  fpinfo->rel_total_cost>  0)
>          {
>              startup_cost = fpinfo->rel_startup_cost;
>              run_cost = fpinfo->rel_total_cost - fpinfo->rel_startup_cost;
>          }
> 
> I think we should use "fpinfo->rel_startup_cost>= 0" here, not
> "fpinfo->rel_startup_cost>  0".  Also, it would be possible that the
> total cost calculated is zero in corner cases (eg, seq_page_cost=0 and
> cpu_tuple_cost=0 for the example), so I think we should change the total
> cost part as well.  Attached is a patch for that.

I added the commit message.  Updated patch attached.  If no objections,
I'll apply that to HEAD only as there are no reports of actual trouble
from this, as far as I know.

Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Laurenz Albe
Date:
Subject: Re: "SELECT ... FROM DUAL" is not quite as silly as it appears
Next
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: WIP: Avoid creation of the free space map for small tables