Re: BRIN cost estimate
От | David Steele |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BRIN cost estimate |
Дата | |
Msg-id | cacba563-a461-b750-fa26-525438263978@pgmasters.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BRIN cost estimate (Emre Hasegeli <emre@hasegeli.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 3/26/17 7:44 AM, Emre Hasegeli wrote: >> If we want to have a variable which stores the number of ranges, then >> I think numRanges is better than numBlocks. I can't imagine many >> people would disagree there. > > I renamed it with other two. > >> At the very least please write a comment to explain this in the code. >> Right now it looks broken. If I noticed this then one day in the >> future someone else will. If you write a comment then person of the >> future will likely read it, and then not raise any questions about the >> otherwise questionable code. > > I added a sentence about it. > >> I do strongly agree that the estimates need improved here. I've >> personally had issues with bad brin estimates before, and I'd like to >> see it improved. I think the patch is not quite complete without it >> also considering stats on expression indexes. If you have time to go >> do that I'd suggest you go ahead with that. > > I copy-pasted expression index support from btcostestimate() as well, > and extended the regression test. > > I think this function can use more polishing before committing, but I > don't know where to begin. There are single functions for every > access method in here. I don't like them being in there to begin > with. selfuncs.s is quite long with all kinds of dependencies and > dependents. I think it would be better to have the access method > selectivity estimation functions under src/access. Maybe we should > start doing so by moving this to src/access/brin/brin_selfuncs.c. > What do you think? I have marked this patch "Needs Review". -- -David david@pgmasters.net
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: