Re: disfavoring unparameterized nested loops - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: disfavoring unparameterized nested loops
Date
Msg-id YzYvkykCw2XmJoUN@momjian.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: disfavoring unparameterized nested loops  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: disfavoring unparameterized nested loops
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 07:46:18PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> > I think the point the original poster as making, and I have made in the
> > past, is that even of two optimizer costs are the same, one might be
> > more penalized by misestimation than the other, and we don't have a good
> > way of figuring that into our plan choices.
> 
> Agreed, but dealing with uncertainty in those numbers is an enormous
> task if you want to do it right.  "Doing it right", IMV, would start
> out by extending all the selectivity estimation functions to include
> error bars; then we could have error bars on rowcount estimates and
> then costs; then we could start adding policies about avoiding plans
> with too large a possible upper-bound cost.  Trying to add such
> policy with no data to go on is not going to work well.
> 
> I think Peter's point is that a quick-n-dirty patch is likely to make
> as many cases worse as it makes better.  That's certainly my opinion
> about the topic.

Agreed on all points --- I was thinking error bars too.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        https://momjian.us
  EDB                                      https://enterprisedb.com

  Indecision is a decision.  Inaction is an action.  Mark Batterson





pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: disfavoring unparameterized nested loops
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add peer authentication TAP test