Re: Add proper planner support for ORDER BY / DISTINCT aggregates - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David Rowley
Subject Re: Add proper planner support for ORDER BY / DISTINCT aggregates
Date
Msg-id CAApHDvra5O1B_=8bZiQ79Rt_+MtamrhcH7XuGoTZe8oz_QEKPQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Add proper planner support for ORDER BY / DISTINCT aggregates  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, 3 Aug 2022 at 01:19, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> writes:
> > I chatted to Andres and Thomas about this last week and their view
> > made me think it might not be quite as clear-cut as "just bump it up a
> > bunch because it's ridiculously low" that I had in mind.  They
> > mentioned about file_fdw and another one that appears to work on
> > mmapped segments, which I don't recall if any names were mentioned.
>
> Um ... DEFAULT_FDW_TUPLE_COST is postgres_fdw-specific, so I do not
> see what connection some other FDW would have to it.

I should have devoted more brain cells to that one.

Anyway, I started a thread at [1].

David

[1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAApHDvopVjjfh5c1Ed2HRvDdfom2dEpMwwiu5-f1AnmYprJngA@mail.gmail.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: David Rowley
Date:
Subject: Why is DEFAULT_FDW_TUPLE_COST so insanely low?
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: PG 15 (and to a smaller degree 14) regression due to ExprEvalStep size