pgsql: Account better for planning cost when choosing whether to use cu - Mailing list pgsql-committers

From Tom Lane
Subject pgsql: Account better for planning cost when choosing whether to use cu
Date
Msg-id E1VDJIL-0007zp-02@gemulon.postgresql.org
Whole thread Raw
List pgsql-committers
Account better for planning cost when choosing whether to use custom plans.

The previous coding in plancache.c essentially used 10% of the estimated
runtime as its cost estimate for planning.  This can be pretty bogus,
especially when the estimated runtime is very small, such as in a simple
expression plan created by plpgsql, or a simple INSERT ... VALUES.

While we don't have a really good handle on how planning time compares
to runtime, it seems reasonable to use an estimate based on the number of
relations referenced in the query, with a rather large multiplier.  This
patch uses 1000 * cpu_operator_cost * (nrelations + 1), so that even a
trivial query will be charged 1000 * cpu_operator_cost for planning.
This should address the problem reported by Marc Cousin and others that
9.2 and up prefer custom plans in cases where the planning time greatly
exceeds what can be saved.

Branch
------
REL9_3_STABLE

Details
-------
http://git.postgresql.org/pg/commitdiff/a5f11e24a4d1afb213c780812a3df14c04d7f845

Modified Files
--------------
src/backend/utils/cache/plancache.c |   52 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
1 file changed, 43 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)


pgsql-committers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: pgsql: Account better for planning cost when choosing whether to use cu
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: pgsql: doc: Explain that ereport doesn't return for ERROR or higher lev