Re: More thoughts about planner's cost estimates

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: More thoughts about planner's cost estimates
Date: 2006-06-01 21:45:40
Message-ID: 200606011445.41158.josh@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Greg,

> > 1) You have n^2 possible two-column combinations. That's a lot of
> > processing and storage.
>
> Yes, that's the hard problem to solve.  Actually, btw, it's n!, not n^2.

Ooops, bad math. Andrew pointed out it's actually n*(n-1)/2, not n!.

Also, we could omit columns unlikely to correlate, such as large text
columns, bytea and numerics with high precisions. Also, we probably don't
need to correlate UNIQUE columns inside ... I think.

--
--Josh

Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL @ Sun
San Francisco

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-06-01 21:53:14 Re: pgsql: Fix calculation of plan node extParams to account for the
Previous Message Kenneth Marshall 2006-06-01 21:33:09 Re: More thoughts about planner's cost estimates