[0] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/6593765/how-to-use-index...
[1] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/309786/how-do-i-force-po... - and https://www.2ndquadrant.com/en/blog/hinting_at_postgresql/ says why Postgres devs think this is a bad feature
First because “we get bugs fixed quickly” is true but not true enough (my own experience: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/17540-7aa1855ad5ec18b4... has not been fixed since reported 1.5y ago)
Second because all the knobs available to tune the query planner (listed in your last link) are obscure and require deep understanding of Postgres internals to make sense of them, which means that only a fraction of people understand them whereas query plans are more pedestrian. They’re also often database-scoped or session-scoped rather than query-scoped, it’s a huge risk of making things worse rather than better.
I don't just not agree, I truly don't understand how they can take that position knowing the nature of the problem.
"The problem"=optimizing over a large space in limited time without complete info. It will never be perfect, there will always be exceptions.
I can't find it here
https://github.com/ossc-db/pg_hint_plan/blob/master/docs/hin...
Because, the mssql WITH(INDEX()) is simple and intuitive. This hint table stuff seems complicated, and it's unclear to me if they can do the simple thing
(Note: WITH(INDEX()) is different than specifying whether you will do SeqScan or IndexScan. it's, like, in SQL we can give a name to an index or to a constraint, and one may want to be able to do IndexScan, yes, but with a specific named index)