Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 10:11 AM, Kouhei Kaigai <kai...@ak.jp.nec.com> wrote:
>> It might be an idea if foreign-scan path is not wiped out regardless of the
>> estimated cost, we will be able to construct an entirely remote-join path
>> even if intermediation path is expensive than local join.
>> A problem is, how to distinct these special paths from usual paths that are
>> eliminated on the previous stage once its path is more expensive.
> Any solution that is based on not eliminating paths that would
> otherwise be discarded based on cost seems to me to be unlikely to be
> feasible. We can't complicate the core path-cost-comparison stuff for
> the convenience of FDW or custom-scan pushdown.
I concur. I'm not even so worried about the cost of add_path as such;
the real problem with not discarding paths as aggressively as possible
is that it will result in a combinatorial explosion in the number of
path combinations that have to be examined at higher join levels.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
