From: | Neil Conway <nconway(at)klamath(dot)dyndns(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | "Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | kleptog(at)svana(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] Idea for the statistics collector |
Date: | 2002-06-21 03:55:38 |
Message-ID: | 20020620235538.44eb4ec2.nconway@klamath.dyndns.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 20 Jun 2002 22:50:04 -0400 (EDT)
"Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> I have thought that some type of feedback from the executor back into
> the optimizer would be a good feature. Not sure how to do it, but your
> idea makes sense. It certainly could update the table statistics after
> a sequential scan.
Search the archives for a thread I started on -hackers called "self-tuning
histograms", which talks about a pretty similar idea. The technique there
applies only to histograms, and builds the histogram based *only* upon
the data provided by the executor.
Tom commented that it's probably a better idea to concentrate on more
elementary techniques, like multi-dimensional histograms, before starting
on ST histograms. I agree, and plan to look at multi-dimensional histograms
when I get some spare time.
Cheers,
Neil
--
Neil Conway <neilconway(at)rogers(dot)com>
PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-06-21 03:59:11 | Re: [GENERAL] Idea for the statistics collector |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-06-21 02:50:04 | Re: [GENERAL] Idea for the statistics collector |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-06-21 03:59:11 | Re: [GENERAL] Idea for the statistics collector |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-06-21 03:25:23 | Re: What is wrong with hashed index usage? |