Re: BUG #14948: cost overflow
От | Jan Schulz |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #14948: cost overflow |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAAc324ivGt6w6iRxh-TFSu7MDNeQB+VQppN8QpOzxGiHJSD9Rw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #14948: cost overflow (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: BUG #14948: cost overflow
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
Hello Tom, On 5 December 2017 at 22:30, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > The index cost estimation code does have some potential for > garbage-in-garbage-out results, but nothing very promising. > One question is whether these indexes are on a non-default > tablespace with a non-default random_page_cost. PG should > prevent you from putting in a negative random_page_cost, but > it's worth checking that. How do I check? > I looked at some other possibilities like a corrupted tree_height > value, but none of them seem to fit the available info. For > instance, the tree_height is only an int, so even if it were the > max negative value it would not explain the cost value you're getting. I must confess that I have no clue what you are talking about. > Don't suppose you'd like to step through btcostestimate() with > a debugger and see where it's going off the rails? I've never done debugging of a C program. If you give me some hints how to do that, I might be able to (Ubuntu, PG from the apt repository). Is there any debug log I might need to enable to get some similar information? Best regards, Jan -- Jan Schulz mail: jasc@gmx.net
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: