Re: Default setting for enable_hashagg_disk - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Greg Stark
Subject Re: Default setting for enable_hashagg_disk
Date
Msg-id CAM-w4HNSsZ=eQ596WawrfTfvJPPUV_5gsM8BpcYQ0hhcnF-44w@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Default setting for enable_hashagg_disk  (Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>)
List pgsql-hackers


On Thu, 9 Apr 2020 at 13:24, Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com> wrote:
On Thu, Apr 09, 2020 at 01:48:55PM +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote:

> It it really any different from our enable_* GUCs? Even if you do e.g.
> enable_sort=off, we may still do a sort. Same for enable_groupagg etc.

Those show that the GUC was disabled by showing disable_cost.  That's what's
different about this one.

Fwiw in the past this was seen not so much as a positive thing but a bug to be fixed. We've talked about carrying a boolean "disabled plan" flag which would be treated as a large cost penalty but not actually be added to the cost in the plan.

The problems with the disable_cost in the cost are (at least):

1) It causes the resulting costs to be useless for comparing the plan costs with other plans.

2) It can cause other planning decisions to be distorted in strange non-linear ways.

 
--
greg

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: Parallel Seq Scan vs kernel read ahead
Next
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2