Bruce Momjian wrote:
Josh Berkus wrote:
...simple web applications, where
queries are never supposed to take more than 50ms. If a query turns up
with an estimated cost of 10000000000, then you know something's wrong;
...
How about a simpler approach that throws an error or warning for
cartesian products? That seems fool-proof.
Seems less fool-proof to me.
Sometimes cartesian products produce plans that run 200 times
faster than plans that don't use the cartesian product.
The first link below shows a cartesian join that took 1.1
seconds (within the range of OK for some web apps), while
plans for the same query that don't use one took 200 seconds.
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2008-03/msg00391.php
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2007-12/msg00090.php
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2008-03/msg00361.php
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
