Re: [HACKERS] Some notes on optimizer cost estimates

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Mike Mascari <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Some notes on optimizer cost estimates
Date: 2000-01-21 01:11:19
Message-ID: 25651.948417079@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Mike Mascari <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com> writes:
>> to be useful for cost estimating. We could make it a parameter like
>> we do for CPU_PAGE_WEIGHT ... but you know and I know that no one
>> ever bothers to adjust those numbers in the field ...

> Would it be possible to place those parameters as run-time
> settings and then write a utility that can ship with the
> distribution to determine those values? Kind of a self-tuning
> utility?

Maybe. I'm not sure the average user would want to run it ---
to get believable numbers, you have to be using a table considerably
bigger than the kernel's disk cache, which means it takes a while.
(I've been testing with a gigabyte-sized table ... one of the index
scan runs took thirty hours :-( ... fortunately I have this machine
to myself, or there would have been some howls about the load.)

But it'd be nice to have comparable numbers for different platforms.
What I was really hoping was that someone on the list would be aware
of existing research I could borrow from.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hiroshi Inoue 2000-01-21 01:44:20 RE: [HACKERS] Some notes on optimizer cost estimates
Previous Message Mike Mascari 2000-01-21 00:49:55 Re: [HACKERS] Some notes on optimizer cost estimates