Re: Bitmap scans vs. the statistics views
От | Jan Wieck |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Bitmap scans vs. the statistics views |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4269601A.7000400@Yahoo.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Bitmap scans vs. the statistics views (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Bitmap scans vs. the statistics views
Re: Bitmap scans vs. the statistics views |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 4/22/2005 3:53 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Jan Wieck <JanWieck@Yahoo.com> writes: >> tuples fetched is the number of raw, possibly dead tuples fetched from >> the heap. Tuples returned is the number of alive tuples ... IIRC. > > No, count_heap_fetch only counts tuples that have already passed the > snapshot test. It could be that the places where the counts are > actually bumped don't line up with your original vision for the > stats design. > > For a regular index scan, it seems to make sense to count (a) number of > TIDs returned by the index AM, and (b) number of tuples returned by the > IndexScan node. There are several intermediate steps > * does the tuple pass the snapshot test > * does the tuple pass any indexqual rechecks (for lossy indexes) > * does the tuple pass any additional non-index restriction > conditions that are being enforced at the scan level Now that you say it ... yes. The whole stats stuff was intended originally to find "DB tuning hints". A large number of tuples returned by index scan and filtered out by additional non-index restrictions indicate that there might be another multicolumn index missing. Jan -- #======================================================================# # It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. # # Let's break this rule - forgive me. # #================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: