Re: [HACKERS] Boom filters for hash joins (was: A design for amcheckheapam verification)

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Robert Haas
Тема Re: [HACKERS] Boom filters for hash joins (was: A design for amcheckheapam verification)
Дата
Msg-id CA+TgmoYKT64JYN6E9Kfb3PRKwuP0ORY1CJDU3ibBuYBsHjcCqA@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] Boom filters for hash joins (was: A design for amcheck heapam verification)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] Boom filters for hash joins (was: A design for amcheckheapam verification)  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Дерево обсуждения 
On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 1:29 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Uh, why does the planner need to be involved at all?

Because it loses if the Bloom filter fails to filter anything.  That's
not at all far-fetched; consider SELECT * FROM a.x, b.x WHERE a.x =
b.x given a foreign key on a.x referencing b(x).

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively)partitioned tables
Следующее
От: Peter Geoghegan
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Boom filters for hash joins (was: A design for amcheckheapam verification)