Re: BUG #8598: Row count estimates of partial indexes
От | Claudio Freire |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #8598: Row count estimates of partial indexes |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAGTBQpb5GHCFUM0+AF7_=qKH5mYe3eZMkJLonDqMy-KTWDoFTQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #8598: Row count estimates of partial indexes (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 11:08 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Marko Tiikkaja <marko@joh.to> writes: >> On 11/17/13 9:18 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> The long-term answer as far as Postgres is concerned is to learn about >>> cross-column correlations, but that's not happening in the near future. > >> I'm completely clueless about how the planner works, but wouldn't it be >> easier to have some kind of separate stats for the conditions in partial >> indexes? It seems better in all cases than trying infer the stats from >> cross-column correlations, even if we had that. > > There's been some discussion of providing a way to hint to ANALYZE about > which combinations of columns are worth gathering cross-column statistics > for. But partial index predicates seem like a pretty bad mechanism for > that. > > regards, tom lane Why? If there's a partial index on some predicate, it does mean the predicate is of common occurence or at least important and it's quite expectable that more precise estimations regarding those queries valuable. Analyze should simply record the selectivity of partial index predicates as it would the MFV of the boolean variable equal to the predicate's result, and modifying the MFV estimation code to look up for those specific stats doesn't seem too difficult.
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: