| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Emre Hasegeli <emre(at)hasegeli(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: BRIN cost estimate |
| Date: | 2017-04-06 15:47:55 |
| Message-ID: | 12378.1491493675@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> + *indexTotalCost += 0.1 * cpu_operator_cost * estimatedRanges *
> + pagesPerRange;
> This is trying to cost up the following code in bringetbitmap()
> if (addrange)
> {
> BlockNumber pageno;
> for (pageno = heapBlk;
> pageno <= heapBlk + opaque->bo_pagesPerRange - 1;
> pageno++)
> {
> MemoryContextSwitchTo(oldcxt);
> tbm_add_page(tbm, pageno);
> totalpages++;
> MemoryContextSwitchTo(perRangeCxt);
> }
> I'm charging 0.1 * cpu_operator_cost for each loop we expect to
> perform here.
TBH, I think that code is in the noise. It doesn't involve any disk
access, or catalog access, or user-defined function calls. I wouldn't
bother trying to account for it.
What you should be accounting for is the ensuing heap page accesses,
but I assume that's done somewhere else.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fujii Masao | 2017-04-06 15:56:59 | Re: Remove pg_stat_progress_vacuum from Table 28.2 |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2017-04-06 15:47:34 | Re: Logical Replication and Character encoding |