On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 4:49 PM, Dilip Kumar <dilipbal...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 3:04 PM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: >> What advantage do you see for considering such a path when the cost of >> innerpath is more than cheapest_total_inner? Remember the more paths >> we try to consider, the more time we spend in the planner. By any >> chance are you able to generate any query where it will give benefit >> by considering costlier innerpath? > > Changed >
It seems you have forgotten to change in the below check: + if (innerpath != NULL && + innerpath->parallel_safe && + (cheapest_startup_inner == NULL || + cheapest_startup_inner->parallel_safe == false || + compare_path_costs(innerpath, cheapest_startup_inner, + STARTUP_COST) < 0)) + /* Found a cheap (or even-cheaper) sorted parallel safer path */ typo /safer/safe Note - Change the patch status in CF app (to Needs Review) whenever you post a new patch. I could see that your other patch also needs a similar update in CF app. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
