On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 3:05 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 1:19 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>>> But this all looks like a pretty substantial amount of work, and
>>> given the low level of user demand for improving the performance of
>>> set operations, it seems to belong fairly far down the to-do list.
>>> So I'm not going to tackle it now. Barring objection, I'll clean up
>>> yesterday's patch a bit more and commit it.
>
>> I agree. If we had infinite resources it would be nice to tackle
>> this, but I think we have bigger fish to fry. In particular, I wonder
>> if you've thought any more about the generalized inner-indexscan
>> machinery, or taken a look at any of the issues around KNNGIST. I'd
>> like to see our limited supply of planner-fu invested in those areas,
>> or perhaps in making inner join removal work.
>
> The two top things on my to-do list for 9.1 are the generalized
> inner-indexscan stuff and automatic replans for parameterized queries.
> I had been hoping to finish one or the other before the next commitfest,
> though time is draining away rapidly.
Cool beans.
> I'll try to look at KNNGIST during the fest.
Thanks. I have posted on it a few times; you may or may not find it
helpful to review those before diving in yourself...
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company