Use fuzzy not exact cost comparison for the final tie-breaker in add_path.
Instead of an exact cost comparison, use a fuzzy comparison with 1e-10 delta after all other path metrics have proved equal. This is to avoid having platform-specific roundoff behaviors determine the choice when two paths are really the same to our cost estimators. Adjust the recently-added test case that made it obvious we had a problem here.
This commit is contained in:
parent
09ff76fcdb
commit
33e99153e9
@ -125,8 +125,11 @@ compare_fractional_path_costs(Path *path1, Path *path2,
|
||||
*
|
||||
* We use fuzzy comparisons so that add_path() can avoid keeping both of
|
||||
* a pair of paths that really have insignificantly different cost.
|
||||
* The fuzz factor is 1% of the smaller cost. (XXX does this percentage
|
||||
* need to be user-configurable?)
|
||||
*
|
||||
* The fuzz_factor argument must be 1.0 plus delta, where delta is the
|
||||
* fraction of the smaller cost that is considered to be a significant
|
||||
* difference. For example, fuzz_factor = 1.01 makes the fuzziness limit
|
||||
* be 1% of the smaller cost.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* The two paths are said to have "equal" costs if both startup and total
|
||||
* costs are fuzzily the same. Path1 is said to be better than path2 if
|
||||
@ -138,16 +141,16 @@ compare_fractional_path_costs(Path *path1, Path *path2,
|
||||
* dominates the other across the whole performance spectrum.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
static PathCostComparison
|
||||
compare_path_costs_fuzzily(Path *path1, Path *path2)
|
||||
compare_path_costs_fuzzily(Path *path1, Path *path2, double fuzz_factor)
|
||||
{
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* Check total cost first since it's more likely to be different; many
|
||||
* paths have zero startup cost.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
if (path1->total_cost > path2->total_cost * 1.01)
|
||||
if (path1->total_cost > path2->total_cost * fuzz_factor)
|
||||
{
|
||||
/* path1 fuzzily worse on total cost */
|
||||
if (path2->startup_cost > path1->startup_cost * 1.01)
|
||||
if (path2->startup_cost > path1->startup_cost * fuzz_factor)
|
||||
{
|
||||
/* ... but path2 fuzzily worse on startup, so DIFFERENT */
|
||||
return COSTS_DIFFERENT;
|
||||
@ -155,10 +158,10 @@ compare_path_costs_fuzzily(Path *path1, Path *path2)
|
||||
/* else path2 dominates */
|
||||
return COSTS_BETTER2;
|
||||
}
|
||||
if (path2->total_cost > path1->total_cost * 1.01)
|
||||
if (path2->total_cost > path1->total_cost * fuzz_factor)
|
||||
{
|
||||
/* path2 fuzzily worse on total cost */
|
||||
if (path1->startup_cost > path2->startup_cost * 1.01)
|
||||
if (path1->startup_cost > path2->startup_cost * fuzz_factor)
|
||||
{
|
||||
/* ... but path1 fuzzily worse on startup, so DIFFERENT */
|
||||
return COSTS_DIFFERENT;
|
||||
@ -167,12 +170,12 @@ compare_path_costs_fuzzily(Path *path1, Path *path2)
|
||||
return COSTS_BETTER1;
|
||||
}
|
||||
/* fuzzily the same on total cost */
|
||||
if (path1->startup_cost > path2->startup_cost * 1.01)
|
||||
if (path1->startup_cost > path2->startup_cost * fuzz_factor)
|
||||
{
|
||||
/* ... but path1 fuzzily worse on startup, so path2 wins */
|
||||
return COSTS_BETTER2;
|
||||
}
|
||||
if (path2->startup_cost > path1->startup_cost * 1.01)
|
||||
if (path2->startup_cost > path1->startup_cost * fuzz_factor)
|
||||
{
|
||||
/* ... but path2 fuzzily worse on startup, so path1 wins */
|
||||
return COSTS_BETTER1;
|
||||
@ -354,7 +357,11 @@ add_path(RelOptInfo *parent_rel, Path *new_path)
|
||||
|
||||
p1_next = lnext(p1);
|
||||
|
||||
costcmp = compare_path_costs_fuzzily(new_path, old_path);
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* Do a fuzzy cost comparison with 1% fuzziness limit. (XXX does this
|
||||
* percentage need to be user-configurable?)
|
||||
*/
|
||||
costcmp = compare_path_costs_fuzzily(new_path, old_path, 1.01);
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* If the two paths compare differently for startup and total cost,
|
||||
@ -403,15 +410,24 @@ add_path(RelOptInfo *parent_rel, Path *new_path)
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* Same pathkeys and outer rels, and fuzzily
|
||||
* the same cost, so keep just one; to decide
|
||||
* which, first check rows and then do an
|
||||
* exact cost comparison.
|
||||
* which, first check rows and then do a fuzzy
|
||||
* cost comparison with very small fuzz limit.
|
||||
* (We used to do an exact cost comparison,
|
||||
* but that results in annoying
|
||||
* platform-specific plan variations due to
|
||||
* roundoff in the cost estimates.) If things
|
||||
* are still tied, arbitrarily keep only the
|
||||
* old path. Notice that we will keep only
|
||||
* the old path even if the less-fuzzy
|
||||
* comparison decides the startup and total
|
||||
* costs compare differently.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
if (new_path->rows < old_path->rows)
|
||||
remove_old = true; /* new dominates old */
|
||||
else if (new_path->rows > old_path->rows)
|
||||
accept_new = false; /* old dominates new */
|
||||
else if (compare_path_costs(new_path, old_path,
|
||||
TOTAL_COST) < 0)
|
||||
else if (compare_path_costs_fuzzily(new_path, old_path,
|
||||
1.0000000001) == COSTS_BETTER1)
|
||||
remove_old = true; /* new dominates old */
|
||||
else
|
||||
accept_new = false; /* old equals or dominates new */
|
||||
|
@ -2798,17 +2798,17 @@ select b.unique1 from
|
||||
Sort Key: b.unique1
|
||||
-> Nested Loop Left Join
|
||||
-> Seq Scan on int4_tbl i2
|
||||
-> Nested Loop Left Join
|
||||
Join Filter: (b.unique1 = 42)
|
||||
-> Nested Loop
|
||||
-> Nested Loop
|
||||
-> Seq Scan on int4_tbl i1
|
||||
-> Nested Loop Left Join
|
||||
Join Filter: (b.unique1 = 42)
|
||||
-> Nested Loop
|
||||
-> Seq Scan on int4_tbl i1
|
||||
-> Index Scan using tenk1_thous_tenthous on tenk1 b
|
||||
Index Cond: ((thousand = i1.f1) AND (i2.f1 = tenthous))
|
||||
-> Index Scan using tenk1_unique1 on tenk1 a
|
||||
Index Cond: (unique1 = b.unique2)
|
||||
-> Index Only Scan using tenk1_thous_tenthous on tenk1 c
|
||||
Index Cond: (thousand = a.thousand)
|
||||
-> Index Scan using tenk1_unique1 on tenk1 a
|
||||
Index Cond: (unique1 = b.unique2)
|
||||
-> Index Only Scan using tenk1_thous_tenthous on tenk1 c
|
||||
Index Cond: (thousand = a.thousand)
|
||||
(15 rows)
|
||||
|
||||
select b.unique1 from
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user