# Re: Really dumb planner decision

 От: Tom Lane Re: Really dumb planner decision 16 апреля 2009 г. , 13:49:43 16192.1239889768@sss.pgh.pa.us (см: обсуждение, исходный текст) Re: Really dumb planner decision  (Merlin Moncure) Re: Really dumb planner decision  ("Kevin Grittner") Re: Really dumb planner decision  (Robert Haas) pgsql-performance

Скрыть дерево обсуждения

Really dumb planner decision  (Matthew Wakeling, )
Re: Really dumb planner decision  (Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz, )
Re: Really dumb planner decision  (Matthew Wakeling, )
Re: Really dumb planner decision  (Robert Haas, )
Re: Really dumb planner decision  (Matthew Wakeling, )
Re: Really dumb planner decision  (Merlin Moncure, )
Re: Really dumb planner decision  (Tom Lane, )
Re: Really dumb planner decision  ("Kevin Grittner", )
Re: Really dumb planner decision  (Merlin Moncure, )
Re: Really dumb planner decision  (Robert Haas, )
Re: Really dumb planner decision  (Matthew Wakeling, )
Re: Really dumb planner decision  (Tom Lane, )
Re: Really dumb planner decision  (Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz, )
Re: Really dumb planner decision  (Matthew Wakeling, )

```Merlin Moncure <> writes:
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 8:05 AM, Matthew Wakeling <> wrote:
>> That solves the problem. So, a view is treated as a subquery then?

> no...the view is simply inlined into the query (think C macro) using
> the rules.  You just bumped into an arbitrary (and probably too low)
> limit into the number of tables the planner can look at in terms of
> optimizing certain types of plans.

Bear in mind that those limits exist to keep you from running into
exponentially increasing planning time when the size of a planning
problem gets big.  "Raise 'em to the moon" isn't really a sane strategy.
It might be that we could get away with raising them by one or two given
the general improvement in hardware since the values were last looked
at; but I'd be hesitant to push the defaults further than that.

regards, tom lane

```

В списке pgsql-performance по дате сообщения:

От: Matthew Wakeling
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: GiST index performance
От: Kris Jurka
Дата:
Сообщение: No hash join across partitioned tables?