Re: rows estimate in explain analyze for the BRIN index
От | Alvaro Herrera |
---|---|
Тема | Re: rows estimate in explain analyze for the BRIN index |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20151230225900.GB58441@alvherre.pgsql обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: rows estimate in explain analyze for the BRIN index (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: rows estimate in explain analyze for the BRIN index
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: > Emre Hasegeli <emre@hasegeli.com> writes: > >> I don’t see how to solve this problem without changing explain analyze output to accommodate for “unknown” value. Idon’t think “0” is a non-confusing representation of “unknown” for most people, and from the practical standpoint, a “besteffort” estimate is better than 0 (i.e. I will be able to estimate how efficient BRIN index is for my tables in termsof the number of tuples retrieved/thrown away) > > We do already have a nearby precedent for returning zero when we don't > have an accurate answer: that's what BitmapAnd and BitmapOr plan nodes > do. (This is documented btw, at the bottom of section 14.1.) Hmm, but amgetbitmap is documented thusly: The number of tuples fetched is returned (this might be just anapproximate count, for instance some AMs do not detectduplicates).http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.5/static/index-functions.html so I'm not sure we're actually violating an expectation that the number of rows is exact. I mean, if we zero out this one, shouldn't we set it to zero for these other documented cases too? -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: