On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 12:30:24PM -0500, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 10:23:31AM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> > Right. And I think the sane ideas are along the lines of estimate
> > & cost corrections (like Tom is saying).
> Let me ask this... how long do you (and others) want to wait for
> those?

That's a good question, but see below.

> It's great that the planner is continually improving, but it
> also appears that there's still a long road ahead. Having a
> dune-buggy to get to your destination ahead of the road might not be
> a bad idea... :)

What evidence do you have that adding per-query hints would take less
time and be less work, even in the short term, than the current
strategy of continuously improving the planner and optimizer?

David Fetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 415 235 3778        AIM: dfetter666
                              Skype: davidfetter

Remember to vote!

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Reply via email to