Re: Function execution costs 'n all that - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Gregory Stark
Subject Re: Function execution costs 'n all that
Date
Msg-id 87lkk3qctz.fsf@stark.xeocode.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Function execution costs 'n all that  (Heikki Linnakangas <heikki@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: Function execution costs 'n all that  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Instead, I'm thinking it might be time to re-introduce some notion of
> > function execution cost into the system, and make use of that info to
> > sort WHERE clauses into a reasonable execution order.

I imagine you've thought of this already but just in case, the cost of the
function call has to be combined with the selectivity to get this right. If
you can do an expensive but very selective clause first and save 100 cheap
calls that almost always return true it may still be worthwhile.

--  Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB          http://www.enterprisedb.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: what happens when...?
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Enabling autovacuum by default (was Re: Autovacuum improvements)