Re: Optimizer misses big in 10.4 with BRIN index
От | Tomas Vondra |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Optimizer misses big in 10.4 with BRIN index |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 456967c4-2e67-03ed-bee0-fc578fec2b87@2ndquadrant.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Optimizer misses big in 10.4 with BRIN index (Emre Hasegeli <emre@hasegeli.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Optimizer misses big in 10.4 with BRIN index
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 07/26/2018 10:11 AM, Emre Hasegeli wrote: >> Isn't the 23040 just the totalpages * 10 per `return totalpages * 10;` >> in bringetbitmap()? > > Yes, it is just confusing. The correct value is on one level up of > the tree. It is 204 + 4404 rows removed by index recheck = 4608, so > the estimate is not only 150x but 733x off :(. > > The sequential scan plan shows 204 + 1125498 rows removed by filter = > 1125702 as the actual table size. However the former plan estimates > to get 3377106 rows from the index. That is 3x of the table size. > The selectivity estimation cannot be greater than 1. If I am not > missing anything, the general statistics of this table should be > seriously outdated. > Hmmm, yeah. It's s bot confusing, and the parallel plan does not improve the situation either :-( Arcadiy, can you provide plans with parallel query disabled? Or even better, produce a test case that reproduces this (using synthetic data, anonymized data or something like that, if needed). regards -- Tomas Vondra http://www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: