Re: [PERFORM] Big IN() clauses etc : feature proposal

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Markus Schaber
Тема Re: [PERFORM] Big IN() clauses etc : feature proposal
Дата
Msg-id 4461EAAC.7030105@logix-tt.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [PERFORM] Big IN() clauses etc : feature proposal  (PFC <lists@peufeu.com>)
Ответы Re: [PERFORM] Big IN() clauses etc : feature proposal  (PFC <lists@peufeu.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Hi, PFC,

PFC wrote:

>     The problem is that you need a set-returning function to retrieve
> the  values. SRFs don't have rowcount estimates, so the plans suck.

What about adding some way of rowcount estimation to SRFs, in the way of:

CREATE FUNCTION foo (para, meters) RETURNS SETOF bar AS
$$ ... function code ... $$ LANGUAGE plpgsql
ROWCOUNT_ESTIMATOR $$ ... estimation code ... $$ ;

Internally, this could create two functions, foo (para, meters) and
estimate_foo(para, meters) that are the same language and coupled
together (just like a SERIAL column and its sequence). The estimator
functions have an implicit return parameter of int8. Parameters may be
NULL when they are not known at query planning time.

What do you think about this idea?

The same scheme could be used to add a CPUCOST_ESTIMATOR to expensive
functions.

HTH,
Markus
--
Markus Schaber | Logical Tracking&Tracing International AG
Dipl. Inf.     | Software Development GIS

Fight against software patents in EU! www.ffii.org www.nosoftwarepatents.org

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Bernd Helmle
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error
Следующее
От: PFC
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [PERFORM] Big IN() clauses etc : feature proposal