On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 5:00 PM Richard Guo <guofengli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 4:03 PM Richard Guo <guofengli...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 10:02 PM Antonin Houska <a...@cybertec.at> wrote: >> >>> I'd prefer a test that demonstrates that the Gather node at the top of >>> the >>> "subproblem plan" is useful purely from the *cost* perspective, rather >>> than >>> due to executor limitation. >> >> >> This patch provides an additional path (Gather atop of subproblem) which >> was not available before. But your concern makes sense that we need to >> show this new path is valuable from competing on cost with other paths. >> >> How about we change to Nested Loop at the topmost? Something like: >> > > Maybe a better example is that we use a small table 'c' to avoid the > Gather node above scanning 'c', so that the path of parallel nestloop is > possible to be generated. > Update the patch with the new test case. Thanks Richard
v2-0001-Gather-partial-paths-for-subproblem-s-topmost-sca.patch
Description: Binary data
