From: | Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | procost for to_tsvector |
Date: | 2015-03-11 14:40:16 |
Message-ID: | 87mw3jsjrs.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
An issue that comes up regularly on IRC is that text search queries,
especially on relatively modest size tables or for relatively
non-selective words, often misplan as a seqscan based on the fact that
to_tsvector has procost=1.
Clearly this cost number is ludicrous.
Getting the right cost estimate would obviously mean taking the cost of
detoasting into account, but even without doing that, there's a strong
argument that it should be increased to at least the order of 100.
(With the default cpu_operator_cost that would make each to_tsvector
call cost 0.25.)
(The guy I was just helping on IRC was seeing a slowdown of 100x from a
seqscan in a query that selected about 50 rows from about 500.)
--
Andrew (irc:RhodiumToad)
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2015-03-11 14:44:31 | Re: procost for to_tsvector |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2015-03-11 14:32:03 | Re: moving from contrib to bin |