| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca> |
| Cc: | ow <oneway_111(at)yahoo(dot)com>, pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: 7.4 - FK constraint performance |
| Date: | 2004-02-13 04:25:36 |
| Message-ID: | 27443.1076646336@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-sql |
Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca> writes:
> Statistics say there are 10 values. Statistics list the 10 most common
> values (all of them). Given this, would it not be reasonable to assume
> that 239 is a recent addition (if there at all) to the table and not
> very common?
We don't know that it's 239 when we make the plan. In order to know
that, we'd have to abandon caching of RI check query plans and re-plan
for each row. That strikes me as inevitably a losing proposition.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-02-13 04:35:03 | Re: [HACKERS] PITR Dead horse? |
| Previous Message | Christopher Browne | 2004-02-13 04:20:53 | Re: Vacuum Delay feature |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-02-13 04:49:56 | Re: 7.4 - FK constraint performance |
| Previous Message | Rod Taylor | 2004-02-13 02:53:45 | Re: 7.4 - FK constraint performance |