On 02/18/11 01:22 PM, Olav Sandstaa wrote:
> Thanks for fixing this problem with the best_ref array not keeping its sort order.
> The changes look fine and I have only some minor comments (see inline).
> I understand why you have introduced the large "perl generator" for testing this. I
> think it is a good idea but I do not
> quite like that the "failure criterion" will be a test timeout. Unfortunately I do
> not have any other or better
> suggestions for how to make such a test. This has also increased the time for running
> the greedy_optimizer test from
> less than 1 second to almost 1 minute. Some things to consider: will "pruning" some
> of the generated test cases help? or
> maybe move this to a new separate test? I leave you to decide and if nobody else have
> objections it is fine to keep it
> as it is.
It should not be necessary to execute the perl generated query for all table count 1..62.
I will likely change this in the final commit+push to only execute the largest of the