[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-6788?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17913377#comment-17913377
]
Julian Hyde commented on CALCITE-6788:
--------------------------------------
Is it possible that {{LoptOptimizeJoinRule}} chose a particular costing
strategy because it needs to consider a very large number of candidate trees
(and their costs)? Remember that a 10-way join has 10! (factorial) possible
trees, and that the metadata system memoizes each cost that it has been asked
for. If my hypothesis is correct, your change will make the algorithm much
slower on large join trees.
> LoptOptimizeJoinRule should delegate costs to optimization planner
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CALCITE-6788
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-6788
> Project: Calcite
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: core
> Affects Versions: 1.38.0
> Reporter: Claude Brisson
> Priority: Major
> Labels: pull-request-available
>
> {{LoptOptimizeJoinRule}} uses costs comparisons to recursively decide whether
> to add a join at the top of the joins tree or to push it down.
> When doing so, instead of directly calling {{mq.getCumulativeCost(rel)}}, it
> should rely on {{call.getPlanner.getCost(rel, mq)}}, which will be used
> thereafter to choose the best joins tree.
> This way, it becomes possible to customize the costs computation during the
> heuristic joins ordering phase by just altering the {{getCost()}} method of
> the optimization planner.
> Without this patch, it is only possible to alter joins costs at the final
> phase of the algorithm, which defeats the goal of customizing them, including
> during the to-top/push-down phase.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
