Re: apply_scanjoin_target_to_paths and partitionwise join
| От | Robert Haas |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: apply_scanjoin_target_to_paths and partitionwise join |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CA+TgmobZS=m_HqrrJv8zf6AhYkV6GtOuerkEB2WopMH3_Ldc0g@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: apply_scanjoin_target_to_paths and partitionwise join (Richard Guo <guofenglinux@gmail.com>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Dec 3, 2025 at 9:53 PM Richard Guo <guofenglinux@gmail.com> wrote: > Fair point. I had envisioned a separate planning step involving a new > RelOptInfo, where we would re-add paths from the scan/join RelOptInfo > after applying the target, explicitly skipping Append paths for > partitioned tables. But I admit that I am unsure if this addresses > any real problems, so the effort might not be justified. I agree that > maybe we should just go ahead with your current patch and see what > happens. I believe that I tried this at the time, and found that the cost was uncomfortably large for very simple queries. I don't remember whether I tried creating a separate RelOptInfo or something slightly simpler, like a new list of paths without a full RelOptInfo. > I suspect the same. IMHO, apply_scanjoin_target_to_paths is quite > brute-force and modifies planner structures in ways we generally > should avoid (no offense intended to the original author of this > function). I agree that the correct long-term solution is to generate > the expected target from the start, which would eliminate the need for > apply_scanjoin_target_to_paths entirely. Agreed. -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: