From: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Mark Dilger <hornschnorter(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: improving GROUP BY estimation |
Date: | 2016-02-26 04:03:34 |
Message-ID: | 56CFCE96.5080306@2ndquadrant.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 02/26/2016 04:32 AM, Mark Dilger wrote:
>
>> On Feb 25, 2016, at 4:59 PM, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>>
...
>>
>> The culprit here is that the two columns are not independent, but
>> are (rather strongly) correlated due to the way you've generated
>> the data.
>
> Yes, that was intentional. Your formula is exactly correct, so far as
> i can tell, for completely uncorrelated data. I don't have any tables
> with completely uncorrelated data, and was therefore interested in
> what happens when the data is correlated and your patch is applied.
>
> BTW, the whole reason I responded to your post is that I think I would like
> to have your changes in the code base. I'm just playing Devil's Advocate
> here, to see if there is room for any improvement.
Sure, that's how I understood it. I just wanted to point out the
correlation, as that might not have been obvious to others.
> Thanks for the patch submission. I hope my effort to review it is on
> the whole more helpful than harmful.
Thanks for the feedback!
regards
--
Tomas Vondra http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI | 2016-02-26 04:17:26 | Re: IF (NOT) EXISTS in psql-completion |
Previous Message | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI | 2016-02-26 03:58:58 | Re: Incorrect formula for SysV IPC parameters |