Re: Removing unneeded self joins - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David Rowley
Subject Re: Removing unneeded self joins
Date
Msg-id CAKJS1f8kUwb3wsXB6_jXM_9RqXOnCskWCC=pY-x637PUo=5pwQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Removing unneeded self joins  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 17 May 2018 at 10:37, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com> writes:
>> IIUC in DB2 (the clear winner at join elimination in the article you
>> mentioned), you get these sorts of things by default (optimisation
>> level 5 includes it), but not if you SET CURRENT QUERY OPTIMIZATION =
>> 3 as many articles recommend for OLTP work.  I think it's interesting
>> that they provide that knob rather than something automatic, and
>> interesting that there is one linear knob to classify your workload
>> rather than N knobs for N optimisations.
>
> There's a lot to be said for that type of approach, as opposed to trying
> to drive it off some necessarily-very-inexact preliminary estimate of
> query cost.  For example, the mere fact that you're joining giant tables
> doesn't in itself suggest that extra efforts in query optimization will be
> repaid.  (If anything, it seems more likely that the user would've avoided
> silliness like useless self-joins in such a case.)
>
> A different line of thought is that, to me, the most intellectually
> defensible rationale for efforts like const-simplification and join
> removal is that opportunities for those things can arise after view
> expansion, even in queries where the original query text didn't seem
> to contain anything extraneous.  (Robert and Andres alluded to this
> upthread, but not very clearly.)  So maybe we could track how much
> the query got changed during rewriting, and use that to drive the
> planner's decisions about how hard to work later on.  But I'm not
> very sure that this'd be superior to having a user-visible knob.

This seems like a good line of thought.  Perhaps a knob is a good
first step, then maybe having the ability to set that knob to
"automatic" is something to aspire for later.

I don't think Alexander should work on this as part of this patch
though. Perhaps we can re-evaluate when Alexander posts some planner
benchmarks from the patch.

-- 
 David Rowley                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Removing unneeded self joins
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Removing unneeded self joins