| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
sort order down into planner, instead of handling it only at the very top
level of the planner. This fixes many things. An explicit sort is now
avoided if there is a cheaper alternative (typically an indexscan) not
only for ORDER BY, but also for the internal sort of GROUP BY. It works
even when there is no other reason (such as a WHERE condition) to consider
the indexscan. It works for indexes on functions. It works for indexes
on functions, backwards. It's just so cool...
CAUTION: I have changed the representation of SortClause nodes, therefore
THIS UPDATE BREAKS STORED RULES. You will need to initdb.
|
|
operators (and some other places), fix rangechecks in int8 to int4
conversion (same problem we recently figured out in pg_atoi).
|
|
failed on 'field < textconstant' ...
|
|
since it's now needed in both optimizer and parser.
|
|
Centralize att_disbursion readout logic.
|
|
|
|
(it should just call the given operator, not look up an = operator).
Fix intltsel() so that all numeric data types are converted to double
before trying to estimate where the given comparison value is in the
known range of column values. intltsel() still needs work, or replacement,
for non-numeric data types ... but for nonintegral numeric types it
should now be delivering reasonable estimates.
|
|
neqsel now behave as per my suggestions in pghackers a few days ago.
selectivity for < > <= >= should work OK for integral types as well, but
still need work for nonintegral types. Since these routines have never
actually executed before :-(, this may result in some significant changes
in the optimizer's choices of execution plans. Let me know if you see
any serious misbehavior.
CAUTION: THESE CHANGES REQUIRE INITDB. pg_statistic table has changed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
approproate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Behal)
|
|
that contain null fields. Old code would produce erratic sort results
because comparisons of tuples containing nulls could produce inconsistent
answers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
> the DTK_MICROSEC case is just like the DTK_MILLISEC case.
> I think this is wrong and it ought to look like
> fsec = rint(fsec * 1000000) / 1000000;
> no?
Tom Lane.
|
|
"HAS_LONG_LONG" is defined based on the assumption that
strtol() would return ERANGE if a platform does not support
64-bit integers. In current PostgreSQL 6.5 (and 6.4.2)
distribution, "HAS_LONG_LONG" is defined only if platform
is "alpha". (See include/port/alpha.h) I think the int4
range check should apply to linux_alpha as well. (I have
not tested yet but I guess this might be applicable to
newer Linux/i386 distributions which includes new GCC which
implements long int as 64-bit int.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
functions, in order to work around oversight in 6.5 release: rtree
index functions haven't got any. Mea culpa ...
|
|
|
|
this one could be useful for people experiencing out-of-memory crashes while
executing queries which retrieve or use a very large number of tuples.
The problem happens when storage is allocated for functions results used in
a large query, for example:
select upper(name) from big_table;
select big_table.array[1] from big_table;
select count(upper(name)) from big_table;
This patch is a dirty hack that fixes the out-of-memory problem for the most
common cases, like the above ones. It is not the final solution for the
problem but it can work for some people, so I'm posting it.
The patch should be safe because all changes are under #ifdef. Furthermore
the feature can be enabled or disabled at runtime by the `free_tuple_memory'
options in the pg_options file. The option is disabled by default and must
be explicitly enabled at runtime to have any effect.
To enable the patch add the follwing line to Makefile.custom:
CUSTOM_COPT += -DFREE_TUPLE_MEMORY
To enable the option at runtime add the following line to pg_option:
free_tuple_memory=1
Massimo
|
|
a non-leading % would be put into the >=/<= patterns. Also, repair
longstanding confusion about whether %% means a literal %%. The SQL92
doesn't say any such thing, and textlike() knows that, but gram.y didn't.
|
