From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | nickf(at)ontko(dot)com |
Cc: | "pgsql-admin" <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Are statistics gathered on function indexes? |
Date: | 2002-06-27 03:37:26 |
Message-ID: | 22262.1025149046@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
"Nick Fankhauser" <nickf(at)ontko(dot)com> writes:
> [see subject]
Nope, they ain't. I agree they should be.
> Can someone tell me how the cost is estimated for retrieving a column based
> on a function that is indexed?
It falls back to a default selectivity estimate, which is something
like 1% or 0.5% (depending on which version you are running).
> Also, even with 2168 rows to gather, my experience based on cases where
> several thousand rows really are returned indicates that the index would
> still be a good choice. Is there a way to make the planner favor index scans
> a bit more? (Other than the drastic set enable_seqscan to off.)
I'd suggest reducing random_page_cost; we've seen a number of anecdotal
reports that the default of 4.0 is too high, though nothing systematic
enough to refute the experiments I did to get that number awhile back.
(IMHO anyway. Others may differ.)
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Nadim Bitar | 2002-06-27 05:15:28 | Authentication problems. |
Previous Message | Nick Fankhauser | 2002-06-26 19:36:01 | Are statistics gathered on function indexes? |