From: | Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at> |
---|---|
To: | "'Tom Lane'" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)hub(dot)org |
Subject: | AW: Optimizer confusion? |
Date: | 2000-08-14 08:24:39 |
Message-ID: | 11C1E6749A55D411A9670001FA68796336804D@sdexcsrv1.f000.d0188.sd.spardat.at |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> I have not yet done anything about this, mainly because I'm unwilling to
> encourage people to use CLUSTER, since it's so far from being ready for
> prime time (see TODO list).
Well imho making the optimizer cluster aware is a step that has to be done
anyway. No need to advertise the cluster feature, but if a user does
already take the chances of the current cluster implementation,
he deserves the fruits, no ?
Actually I would be using the cluster command on a freshly created table
with an index that I know corresponds to insert order. No risc here.
Imho the assumption that the dba guards the cluster state of his tables
is better than assuming random distribution of a clustered table.
Of course a real statistic for all indices as we discussed before would be
better, but assuming perfect clustering state of a clustered index would be
a good step to do in lack of such a statistic.
Andreas
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Karel Zak | 2000-08-14 12:06:50 | Re: dangers of setlocale() in backend (was: problem with float8 input format) |
Previous Message | Philip Warner | 2000-08-14 01:42:19 | Re: Optimizer confusion? |