| From: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Bitmap scans vs. the statistics views |
| Date: | 2005-04-22 18:23:45 |
| Message-ID: | 20050422182345.GR58835@decibel.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I would like to know if bitmap scans are being used on a table. I think
it's worth adding to the stats views, though I'm not sure on the best
way. For example, this means that a query on one table can now scan
multiple indexes, but it doesn't seem right to lump that in with
'traditional' index scans. An extreme view would be to add new bitmap
scan columns to pg_stat(io)_(tables|indexes), but that might be
overkill.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Database Consultant decibel(at)decibel(dot)org
Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828
Windows: "Where do you want to go today?"
Linux: "Where do you want to go tomorrow?"
FreeBSD: "Are you guys coming, or what?"
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Marko Ristola | 2005-04-22 18:39:12 | Re: Bad n_distinct estimation; hacks suggested? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-04-22 18:21:31 | Re: Woo hoo ... a whole new set of compiler headaches!! :) |