pg.ddx.io  pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Paul Ramsey <pramsey@cleverelephant.ca>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Allowing extensions to supply operator-/function-specific info
Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2019 17:52:23 -0500
Message-ID: <31607.1551739943@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <B256FF5D-EF73-4FDE-A50D-9C9E9FB3B159@cleverelephant.ca>
References: <15193.1548028093@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<6953.1548297558@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<6044.1548524131@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CA+TgmoYkLjVcbZZ8PYyaCTMYZJCQ8eiod8MSRMDaczjBw=a0bQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<19993.1548697885@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CACowWR3jZ4Xo1atU5xTDpEoeeKSw1==sKPhCy3a29HtcE9oQVQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<7671.1551135674@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CACowWR3_RyPSYO6a8TVLZ7KnL_rDNh2ywkSTeqFmrAPpP4y6-g@mail.gmail.com>
	<11051.1551139751@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CACowWR1ycbLx0t7WwT8uuJnK7E3U+tfzKXBRPaQrgHiCG+hvbA@mail.gmail.com>
	<14747.1551219541@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<91BAE1F4-7C16-4F87-849F-B01175A8D7D8@cleverelephant.ca>
	<17244.1551226168@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<74C11775-67A7-48D2-B1E3-24C52A686F86@cleverelephant.ca>
	<15086.1551310830@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<BBB5F584-5036-4A11-B5FF-D30632EC9E1A@cleverelephant.ca>
	<24277.1551320775@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CACowWR3fZRV6fGrH7vsVLqLz0TQJpmzb=wcipqAQBVZSn0sT4g@mail.gmail.com>
	<26156.1551734021@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<B256FF5D-EF73-4FDE-A50D-9C9E9FB3B159@cleverelephant.ca>

Paul Ramsey <pramsey@cleverelephant.ca> writes:
> Gotcha, done and now have an implementation that passes all our regression tests.

Very cool!  So the next step, I guess, is to address your original problem
by cranking up the cost estimates for these functions --- have you tried
that yet?  In principle you should be able to do that and not have any
bad planning side-effects, but this is all pretty new territory so maybe
some problems remain to be ironed out.

BTW, if you'd like me to review the code you added for this, I'd be happy
to do so.  I've never looked at PostGIS' innards, but probably I can make
sense of the code for this despite that.

			regards, tom lane




view thread (38+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <31607.1551739943@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Permalink:  ../31607.1551739943@sss.pgh.pa.us/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/31607.1551739943@sss.pgh.pa.us

 · 

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: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, pramsey@cleverelephant.ca, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
  Subject: Re: Allowing extensions to supply operator-/function-specific info
  In-Reply-To: <31607.1551739943@sss.pgh.pa.us>

* 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