Re: Optimizer internals

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От John Vincent
Тема Re: Optimizer internals
Дата
Msg-id c841561b0606151623p3ed68f8g3e1df4143549a8d4@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Optimizer internals  ("Jim C. Nasby" <jnasby@pervasive.com>)
Список pgsql-performance



decibel=# create index test on i ( sum(i) );
ERROR:  cannot use aggregate function in index expression
decibel=#

BTW, there have been a number of proposals to negate the effect of not
having visibility info in indexes. Unfortunately, none of them have come
to fruition yet, mostly because it's a very difficult problem to solve.
But it is something that the community would like to see happen.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant       jnasby@pervasive.com
Pervasive Software       http://pervasive.com    work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf       cell: 512-569-9461


Yeah we got the same thing when we tried it.

I thought about the whole thing on the way home and the downside is that we might have to ditch pgsql.

As far as implementing it, it might make sense to translate READ UNCOMMITTED to that new functionality. If the default isolation level stays the current level, the people who need it can use it via WITH UR or somesuch.

I know it's not that easy but it's an idea. I'm also thinking that the table inheritance we're going to be taking advantage of in 8.1 on the new server might make the sequence scan less of an issue. The only reason the sequence scan really blows is that we have a single table with 220M rows and growing.

В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: SAN performance mystery
Следующее
От: Mark Lewis
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: SAN performance mystery