Re: -HEAD planner issue wrt hash_joins on dbt3 ?
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: -HEAD planner issue wrt hash_joins on dbt3 ? |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 17841.1158781930@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: -HEAD planner issue wrt hash_joins on dbt3 ? (Matteo Beccati <php@beccati.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: -HEAD planner issue wrt hash_joins on dbt3 ?
Re: -HEAD planner issue wrt hash_joins on dbt3 ? Re: -HEAD planner issue wrt hash_joins on dbt3 ? |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Matteo Beccati <php@beccati.com> writes:
> Tom Lane ha scritto:
>> Matteo Beccati <php@beccati.com> writes:
>>> I cannot see anything bad by using something like that:
>>> if (histogram is large/representative enough)
>>
>> Well, the question is exactly what is "large enough"? I feel a bit
>> uncomfortable about applying the idea to a histogram with only 10
>> entries (especially if we ignore two of 'em). With 100 or more,
>> it sounds all right. What's the breakpoint?
> Yes, I think 100-200 could be a good breakpoint.
I've committed this change with (for now) 100 as the minimum histogram
size to use. Stefan, are you interested in retrying your benchmark?
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: