Re: Significant Execution Time Difference Between PG13.14 and PG16.4 for Query on information_schema Tables. - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David Rowley
Subject Re: Significant Execution Time Difference Between PG13.14 and PG16.4 for Query on information_schema Tables.
Date
Msg-id CAApHDvp1mue1a5fdfsa2z2mAS6v2d9+kxMzxH7GhAiC0Z7o8Mw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Significant Execution Time Difference Between PG13.14 and PG16.4 for Query on information_schema Tables.  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Significant Execution Time Difference Between PG13.14 and PG16.4 for Query on information_schema Tables.
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 at 09:52, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> The other problem with this is that it breaks one test case in
> memoize.sql: a query that formerly generated a memoize plan
> now does not use memoize.  I am not sure why not --- does that
> mean anything to you?

The reason it works in master is that get_memoize_path() calls
extract_lateral_vars_from_PHVs() and finds PlaceHolderVars to use as
the Memoize keys. With your patch PlannerInfo.placeholder_list is
empty.

The commit that made this work is 069d0ff02. Richard might be able to
explain better. I don't quite understand why RelOptInfo.lateral_vars
don't contain these in the first place.

David



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tomas Vondra
Date:
Subject: Re: PoC: prefetching data between executor nodes (e.g. nestloop + indexscan)
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Significant Execution Time Difference Between PG13.14 and PG16.4 for Query on information_schema Tables.