From: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Satoshi Nagayasu <nagayasus(at)nttdata(dot)co(dot)jp> |
Cc: | ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: pgstattuple extension for indexes |
Date: | 2006-08-23 07:14:19 |
Message-ID: | 20060823071419.GI88878@pervasive.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
On Fri, Aug 18, 2006 at 09:15:59AM +0900, Satoshi Nagayasu wrote:
> ITAGAKI Takahiro wrote:
> > But the method has the above problem. So I suggest to use whether
> > the right link points to the next adjacent page or not.
> >
> > if (opaque->btpo_next != P_NONE && opaque->btpo_next != blkno + 1)
> > stat->fragments++;
>
> Well, in that way, following two conditions,
> [1] [x] [2] [y] [3]
> and
> [3] [x] [2] [y] [1]
> will be calculated as same fragmentation ratio(100%), I can't agree
> with that, because both will generate different costs while index scan
> in the real world (I don't care about page splitting algorithm now).
What about just reporting the correlation of pages in the index, as well
as fragmentation?
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dave Page | 2006-08-23 07:14:47 | Re: Problem with mailing list? |
Previous Message | Dave Page | 2006-08-23 07:10:23 | Re: pgsql-patches reply-to (was Re: [PATCHES] selecting large result sets in psql using cursors) |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bernd Helmle | 2006-08-23 07:42:19 | Re: [HACKERS] COPY view |
Previous Message | Dave Page | 2006-08-23 07:10:23 | Re: pgsql-patches reply-to (was Re: [PATCHES] selecting large result sets in psql using cursors) |