"Jim C. Nasby" <jim@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > I completely agree that it's much better *in the long run* to improve > the planner and the statistics system so that we don't need hints. But > there's been no plan put forward for how to do that, which means we also > have no idea when some of these problems will be resolved. You keep arguing on the assumption that the planner is static and there's no one working on it. That is false --- although this thread is certainly wasting a lot of time that could have been used more productively ;-). I also dispute your assumption that hints of the style you propose will be easier to implement or maintain than the sort of statistical-assumption tweaking that's been counter-proposed. Just for starters, how are you going to get those hints through the parser and rewriter? That's going to take an entire boatload of very ugly code that isn't needed at all in a saner design. regards, tom lane
