Re: [HACKERS] set the cost of an aggregate function

2010-02-08 Thread Jaime Casanova
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 7:19 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: > > The answer is nobody got round to enhancing this yet and well considered > proposals and subsequent patches would be welcome. > what is a well considered proposal in this area? the transition function cost should be applied to every row cost

Re: [HACKERS] set the cost of an aggregate function

2009-12-03 Thread Simon Riggs
On Mon, 2009-11-30 at 11:53 -0500, Jaime Casanova wrote: > 2009/11/30 Jaime Casanova : > > Hi, > > > > why we can't do $subject? it could have any benefit on the planner? > > > > seems like while we can set the cost of the state transition function, > that cost is not propagated... The cost of co

Re: [HACKERS] set the cost of an aggregate function

2009-12-02 Thread Robert Haas
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 11:53 AM, Jaime Casanova wrote: > 2009/11/30 Jaime Casanova : >> Hi, >> >> why we can't do $subject? it could have any benefit on the planner? >> > > seems like while we can set the cost of the state transition function, > that cost is not propagated... I thought for sure

Re: [HACKERS] set the cost of an aggregate function

2009-11-30 Thread Jaime Casanova
2009/11/30 Jaime Casanova : > Hi, > > why we can't do $subject? it could have any benefit on the planner? > seems like while we can set the cost of the state transition function, that cost is not propagated... -- Atentamente, Jaime Casanova Soporte y capacitación de PostgreSQL Asesoría y desarr

[HACKERS] set the cost of an aggregate function

2009-11-29 Thread Jaime Casanova
Hi, why we can't do $subject? it could have any benefit on the planner? -- Atentamente, Jaime Casanova Soporte y capacitación de PostgreSQL Asesoría y desarrollo de sistemas Guayaquil - Ecuador Cel. +59387171157 -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make chan