Re: [PATCHES] GIN improvements

Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru> writes:
> I'm very sorry, but v0.24 has a silly bug with not initialized value :(.
> New version is attached

I looked at this a little bit --- it needs proofreading ("VACUUME"?).

Do we really need an additional column in pgstat table entries in
order to store something that looks like it can be derived from the
other columns? The stats tables are way too big already.

Also, I really think it's a pretty bad idea to make index cost
estimation depend on the current state of the index's pending list
--- that state seems far too transient to base plan choices on.
It's particularly got to be nuts to turn off indexscans entirely
if the pending list is "too full". Having some lossy pages might
not be great but I don't believe it can be so bad that you should
go to a seqscan all the time.

regards, tom lane