Re: SQL:2011 application time
От | Paul A Jungwirth |
---|---|
Тема | Re: SQL:2011 application time |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+renyUunzKNP4Z-b71GQG=y652d7aX+y5kyUiGOLBzVOLOdAA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: SQL:2011 application time (Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 3:55 AM Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> wrote: > Have you checked that the generated queries can use indexes and have > suitable performance? Do you have example execution plans maybe? This took longer than expected, but I wrote a long blog post about it here: https://illuminatedcomputing.com/posts/2024/09/benchmarking-temporal-foreign-keys/ The short answer is that yes we use the index, and the query plan is reasonable. I compared performance against two alternate implementations, and range_agg was fastest most of the time. When you have a lot of invalid FK checks, the implementation in Snodgrass's book wins, because it can short-circuit the plan and return a false result without executing most of it. But that seems like an unusual situation, and we should optimize for mostly-valid FK checks instead. There are some more experiments I'd like to do (see the end of that post), but for now I plan to prioritize getting the FOR PORTION OF patch ready to commit. But if there is anything you'd like to know more urgently, let me know. Yours, -- Paul ~{:-) pj@illuminatedcomputing.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: