From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-hackers list" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: patternsel() and histogram_selectivity() and the hard cutoff of 100 |
Date: | 2008-03-09 00:33:54 |
Message-ID: | 25674.1205022834@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> "Gregory Stark" <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
>> So I had a thought about how to soften the controversial hard cutoff of 100
>> for the use of the histogram selectivity. Instead of switching 100% one way or
>> the other between the two heuristics why not calculate both and combine them.
>> The larger the sample size from the histogram the more we can weight the
>> histogram calculation. The smaller the histogram size the more we weight the
>> heuristic.
> Incidentally I hacked up a patch to do this:
Applied with revisions --- I thought it was better to let the caller of
histogram_selectivity make the decision about how to combine the
estimates, instead of hard-wiring the choice into that subroutine.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Oleg Bartunov | 2008-03-09 02:30:57 | Re: Google Summer of Code 2008 |
Previous Message | Dave Cramer | 2008-03-08 22:12:25 | Re: Doubt in index scan code |