Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise aggregation/grouping

I looked over the patch and saw this:

@@ -1800,6 +1827,9 @@ cost_merge_append(Path *path, PlannerInfo *root,
  */
  run_cost += cpu_operator_cost * tuples;

+ /* Add MergeAppend node overhead like we do it for the Append node */
+ run_cost += cpu_tuple_cost * DEFAULT_APPEND_COST_FACTOR * tuples;
+
  path->startup_cost = startup_cost + input_startup_cost;
  path->total_cost = startup_cost + run_cost + input_total_cost;
 }

You're doing that right after a comment that says we don't do that. It
also does look like the "run_cost += cpu_operator_cost * tuples" is
trying to do the same thing, so perhaps it's worth just replacing
that, which by default will double that additional cost, although
doing so would have the planner slightly prefer a MergeAppend to an
Append than previously.

+#define DEFAULT_APPEND_COST_FACTOR 0.5

I don't really think the DEFAULT_APPEND_COST_FACTOR adds much. it
means very little by itself. It also seems that most of the other cost
functions just use the magic number.

--
 David Rowley                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services