On Wed, 21 Jan 2004, Tom Lane wrote:
The GEQO planner module contains six different recombination algorithms,
only one of which is actually used --- the others are ifdef'd out, and
have been ever since we got the code. Does anyone see a reason not to
prune the deadwood?
considering the
scott.marlowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, 21 Jan 2004, Tom Lane wrote:
The GEQO planner module contains six different recombination algorithms,
considering the recent discussion about REALLY slow query planning by the
GEQO module, it might be worth testing each one to see which works
On Thu, 22 Jan 2004, Tom Lane wrote:
scott.marlowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, 21 Jan 2004, Tom Lane wrote:
The GEQO planner module contains six different recombination algorithms,
considering the recent discussion about REALLY slow query planning by the
GEQO module, it might be
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm assuming that the original author of the GEQO code already did
that testing ...
Removing the code without bothering to verify this assumption is a
little unwise, IMHO: given the low quality of the rest of the GEQO
code, I wouldn't be surprised to learn
Neil Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm assuming that the original author of the GEQO code already did
that testing ...
Removing the code without bothering to verify this assumption is a
little unwise, IMHO:
Fair enough. I did a little bit of poking
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Where are we going to find a representative test set of
dozen-or-more- way SQL join queries?
Interesting that you should mention that. I've been thinking for a
while that we need a much more extensive test suite for the query
optimizer. This would allow us to
