Re: rows estimate in explain analyze for the BRIN index
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: rows estimate in explain analyze for the BRIN index |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 23886.1451506336@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: rows estimate in explain analyze for the BRIN index (Emre Hasegeli <emre@hasegeli.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: rows estimate in explain analyze for the BRIN index
Re: rows estimate in explain analyze for the BRIN index |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
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. I don’tthink “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.) > The number of retrieved and thrown away rows are already available on > the upper part of the plan. Bitmap Index Scan should provide the rows > that matched the index. It doesn't have that information. > Another alternative would be just returning > the number of matching pages (by not multiplying with 10). It might > be better understood. No, it would not, at least not unless we found a way to explicitly mark the output as being blocks not rows (which would doubtless break a lot of existing client-side code). Zero is fairly clearly an impossible value, whereas anything that's not zero is going to be taken at face value by many users. On balance I think likely the best thing to do is return zero, and document that behavior. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: