[jira] [Commented] (CALCITE-4264) The query planner should take CPU cost into account

["Vladimir Sitnikov (Jira)" <ji...@apache.org>]

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-4264?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17198433#comment-17198433 ] 

Vladimir Sitnikov commented on CALCITE-4264:
--------------------------------------------

{quote} Low impact proposal: Compare first the row cost, and only if the row cost is equal, compare by CPU cost.{quote}
It would rarely be useful in practice: row cost almost always differ, so the approach of "sort by rows first, then by CPU" would be almost the same as "sort by rows only".

> The query planner should take CPU cost into account
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CALCITE-4264
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-4264
>             Project: Calcite
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Thomas Rebele
>            Priority: Major
>
> Calcite only takes the row count into account when optimizing the queries. See [the relevant lines in VolcanoCost|https://github.com/apache/calcite/blob/52a57078ba081b24b9d086ed363c715485d1a519/core/src/main/java/org/apache/calcite/plan/volcano/VolcanoCost.java#L98-L116]. However, two plans might have the same row count, but differ greatly in CPU cost. This happens for example when the limit sort rule ([CALCITE-3920|https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-3920]) is activated. The row cost is the same, the EnumerableLimitSort only sorts the input partially, so has a lower CPU cost.
> Low impact proposal: Compare first the row cost, and only if the row cost is equal, compare by CPU cost.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)