Re: benchmarking the query planner
От | Nathan Boley |
---|---|
Тема | Re: benchmarking the query planner |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 6fa3b6e20812111612m74555e44sfd3ef0ce5431ea9d@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: benchmarking the query planner ("Vladimir Sitnikov" <sitnikov.vladimir@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: benchmarking the query planner
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
>> What is the specific difference between what you are talking about and >> what scalarineqsel already implements? > > Hmm... Northing new. Feel sorry for bothering you. I did not realize > histograms are implemented. > Well, ISTM there is a profound difference. For scalarineqsel we care about the total number of values in a bucket. For eqsel we care about the total number of *distinct* values in each bucket ( which we don't track ). IMHO, the whole idea of increasing mcv's seems a mistake. Why not use the limited storage in pg_statistic to try and estimate the selectivity for ranges of values rather than a single value? That gives way better coverage of the distribution. If the number of values is too high to fit in a single bucket we put it in an mcv slot anyways. *That* should be the mechanism by which the number of mcv's increases. I guess this is a bit off topic for the middle of a commit fest though. -Nathan
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: