On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 2:48 PM David Rowley <dgrowle...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Oct 2022 at 16:47, Richard Guo <guofengli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Currently in the patch the optimization is done before we check for
> > presorted paths or do the explicit sort of the cheapest path. How about
> > we move this optimization into the branch where we've found any
> > presorted paths? Maybe something like:
>
> I've attached a patch to that effect, but it turns out a bit more
> complex than what you imagined. We still need to handle the case for
> when there's no path that has the required pathkeys and we must add a
> SortPath to the cheapest path. That requires adding some similar code
> to add the LimitPath after the foreach loop over the pathlist is over.
Thanks for the new patch. Previously I considered we just apply this
optimization for adequately-presorted paths so that we can just fetch
the first row from that path. But yes we can also do this optimization
for explicit-sort case so that we can get the result from a top-1
heapsort, just like the new patch does.
I was also getting some weird plans like:
>
> regression=# explain select distinct on (four) four,hundred from tenk1
> where four=0 order by 1,2;
> QUERY PLAN
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Sort (cost=0.20..0.20 rows=1 width=8)
> Sort Key: hundred
> -> Limit (cost=0.00..0.19 rows=1 width=8)
> -> Seq Scan on tenk1 (cost=0.00..470.00 rows=2500 width=8)
> Filter: (four = 0)
>
> To stop the planner from adding that final sort, I opted to hack the
> LimitPath's pathkeys to say that it's already sorted by the
> PlannerInfo's sort_pathkeys. That feels slightly icky, but it does
> seem a little wasteful to initialise a sort node on every execution of
> the plan to sort a single tuple.
I don't get how this plan comes out. It seems not correct because Limit
node above an unsorted path would give us an unpredictable row. I tried
this query without the hack to LimitPath's pathkeys and I get plans
below, with or with index scan:
explain (costs off) select distinct on (four) four,hundred from tenk1
where four=0 order by 1,2;
QUERY PLAN
-----------------------------------------------------
Result
-> Limit
-> Index Scan using tenk1_hundred on tenk1
Filter: (four = 0)
explain (costs off) select distinct on (four) four,hundred from tenk1
where four=0 order by 1,2;
QUERY PLAN
----------------------------------
Limit
-> Sort
Sort Key: hundred
-> Seq Scan on tenk1
Filter: (four = 0)
Thanks
Richard
