Re: distinct estimate of a hard-coded VALUES list
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: distinct estimate of a hard-coded VALUES list |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 25962.1471555512@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | distinct estimate of a hard-coded VALUES list (Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: distinct estimate of a hard-coded VALUES list
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com> writes: > So even though it knows that 6952 values have been shoved in the bottom, it > thinks only 200 are going to come out of the aggregation. This seems like > a really lousy estimate. In more complex queries than the example one > given it leads to poor planning choices. > Is the size of the input list not available to the planner at the point > where it estimates the distinct size of the input list? I'm assuming that > if it is available to EXPLAIN than it is available to the planner. Does it > know how large the input list is, but just throw up its hands and use 200 > as the distinct size anyway? It does know it, what it doesn't know is how many duplicates there are. If we do what I think you're suggesting, which is assume the entries are all distinct, I'm afraid we'll just move the estimation problems somewhere else. I recall some talk of actually running an ANALYZE-like process on the elements of a VALUES list, but it seemed like overkill at the time and still does. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: