Re: On disable_cost

Alena Rybakina <a.rybakina@postgrespro.ru>

From: Alena Rybakina <a.rybakina@postgrespro.ru>
To: Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>
Cc: David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>, Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2024-10-02T18:13:03Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Hi!

On 02.10.2024 21:04, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> I didn't want a running total, but maybe I misunderstood what a disabled
> node is; see below.
>
>>> If you see a join where two plans were disabled, that's useful information.
>> I'm not sure if I follow what you mean here.  The patch will show
>> "Disabled: true" for both the inner and outer side of the join if both
>> of those are disabled.  The difference is that my patch does not show
>> the join itself is disabled like master does. I thought that's what
>> you were complaining about. Can you show an example of what you mean?
> I ran the following example, and now I am confused.
>
>    CREATE TABLE tab_a (id integer);
>
>    CREATE TABLE tab_b (id integer);
>
>    SET enable_nestloop = off;
>    SET enable_hashjoin = off;
>
>    EXPLAIN SELECT * FROM tab_a JOIN tab_b USING (id);
>
>                                 QUERY PLAN
>    ═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
>     Merge Join  (cost=359.57..860.00 rows=32512 width=4)
>       Merge Cond: (tab_a.id = tab_b.id)
>       ->  Sort  (cost=179.78..186.16 rows=2550 width=4)
>             Sort Key: tab_a.id
>             ->  Seq Scan on tab_a  (cost=0.00..35.50 rows=2550 width=4)
>       ->  Sort  (cost=179.78..186.16 rows=2550 width=4)
>             Sort Key: tab_b.id
>             ->  Seq Scan on tab_b  (cost=0.00..35.50 rows=2550 width=4)
>
> I would have expected to see "Disabled nodes: 2" with the merge join,
> because both the nested loop join and the hash join have been disabled.
>
> Why is there no disabled node shown?
>
Disabled nodes show the number of disabled paths, you simply don’t have 
them here in mergejoin, because hashjoin and nestedloop were not 
selected. The reason is the compare_path_costs_fuzzily function, because 
the function decides which path is better based on fewer disabled nodes. 
hashjoin and nestedloop have 1 more nodes compared to mergejoin. you can 
disable mergejoin, I think the output about this will appear.

-- 
Regards,
Alena Rybakina
Postgres Professional

Commits

  1. Doc: add detail about EXPLAIN's "Disabled" property

  2. Adjust EXPLAIN's output for disabled nodes

  3. Fix order of parameters in a cost_sort call

  4. Show number of disabled nodes in EXPLAIN ANALYZE output.

  5. Treat number of disabled nodes in a path as a separate cost metric.

  6. Remove grotty use of disable_cost for TID scan plans.