Re: [PATCHES] GIN improvements - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [PATCHES] GIN improvements
Date
Msg-id 603c8f070902041140h35c2aeo8c4ed79cd16400f8@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCHES] GIN improvements  (Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>)
Responses Re: [PATCHES] GIN improvements
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-02-02 at 20:38 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Also, I really think it's a pretty bad idea to make index cost
>> estimation depend on the current state of the index's pending list
>> --- that state seems far too transient to base plan choices on.
>
> I'm confused by this. Don't we want to base the plan choice on the most
> current data, even if it is transient?
>
> Regards,
>        Jeff Davis

Well, there's nothing to force that plan to be invalidated when the
state of the pending list changes, is there?

...Robert


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Merlin Moncure
Date:
Subject: Re: patch to fix client only builds
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [BUGS] BUG #4516: FOUND variable does not work after RETURN QUERY