pg.ddx.io  pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive  
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at>
To: Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Andrew Gierth <andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Problems with plan estimates in postgres_fdw
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2019 15:21:11 +0100
Message-ID: <30524.1550499671@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5C6A5FD3.8080102@lab.ntt.co.jp>
References: <87pnz1aby9.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk>
	<1175.1533220908@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<5BB739CD.6040002@lab.ntt.co.jp>
	<5BBC4140.50403@lab.ntt.co.jp>
	<5C17A00E.5000005@lab.ntt.co.jp>
	<5C232F39.9060509@lab.ntt.co.jp>
	<5C25C7B5.2010802@lab.ntt.co.jp>
	<5C518631.5080401@lab.ntt.co.jp>
	<10994.1549559088@localhost>
	<5C5D778F.3080501@lab.ntt.co.jp>
	<19433.1549962210@localhost>
	<5C669DFD.30002@lab.ntt.co.jp>
	<16616.1550234762@localhost>
	<5C6A5FD3.8080102@lab.ntt.co.jp>

Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:

> (2019/02/15 21:46), Antonin Houska wrote:
> > ok, I understand now. I assume that the patch
> >
> > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/5C66A056.60007%40lab.ntt.co.jp
> >
> > obsoletes the code snippet we discussed above.
> 
> Sorry, I don't understand this.  Could you elaborate on that?

I thought that the assignments

+ 			startup_cost += outerrel->reltarget->cost.startup;

and

+ 			run_cost += outerrel->reltarget->cost.per_tuple * input_rows;

in the patch you posted in
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/5C66A056.60007%40lab.ntt.co.jp do
replace

+			startup_cost += foreignrel->reltarget->cost.startup;

and

+			run_cost += foreignrel->reltarget->cost.per_tuple * rows;

respectively, which you originally included in the following part of
0001-postgres_fdw-Perform-UPPERREL_ORDERED-step-remotely-v3.patch:

@@ -2829,6 +2872,22 @@ estimate_path_cost_size(PlannerInfo *root,
 			run_cost += foreignrel->reltarget->cost.per_tuple * rows;
 		}
 
+		/*
+		 * If this is an UPPERREL_ORDERED step on the final scan/join
+		 * relation, the costs obtained from the cache wouldn't yet contain
+		 * the eval cost for the final scan/join target, which would have been
+		 * updated by apply_scanjoin_target_to_paths(); add the eval cost now.
+		 */
+		if (fpextra && !IS_UPPER_REL(foreignrel))
+		{
+			/* The costs should have been obtained from the cache. */
+			Assert(fpinfo->rel_startup_cost >= 0 &&
+				   fpinfo->rel_total_cost >= 0);
+
+			startup_cost += foreignrel->reltarget->cost.startup;
+			run_cost += foreignrel->reltarget->cost.per_tuple * rows;
+		}
+
 		/*
 		 * Without remote estimates, we have no real way to estimate the cost
 		 * of generating sorted output.  It could be free if the query plan


-- 
Antonin Houska
Cybertec Schönig & Schönig GmbH
Gröhrmühlgasse 26, A-2700 Wiener Neustadt
Web: https://www.cybertec-postgresql.com




view thread (48+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <30524.1550499671@localhost>
Permalink:  ../30524.1550499671@localhost/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/30524.1550499671@localhost

 · 

reply

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
  Cc: ah@cybertec.at, fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk
  Subject: Re: Problems with plan estimates in postgres_fdw
  In-Reply-To: <30524.1550499671@localhost>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox