| From: | Mark Kirkwood <mark(dot)kirkwood(at)catalyst(dot)net(dot)nz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, "Sergey E(dot) Koposov" <math(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, Jim Nasby <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: ANALYZE sampling is too good |
| Date: | 2013-12-11 08:09:39 |
| Message-ID: | 52A81DC3.2060105@catalyst.net.nz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 11/12/13 19:34, Simon Riggs wrote:
>
> Realistically, I never heard of an Oracle DBA doing advanced
> statistical mathematics before setting the sample size on ANALYZE. You
> use the default and bump it up if the sample is insufficient for the
> data.
>
I'm not sure that Oracle's stats and optimizer design is an example to
be envied - pretty much all Oracle DBA's I've encountered will apply
hints all queries to get the plan they want...
Regards
Mark
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2013-12-11 08:27:07 | Re: Time-Delayed Standbys |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2013-12-11 08:01:04 | Re: invalid magic number in log segment |