Re: [pgsql-hackers] Group-count estimation statistics

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [pgsql-hackers] Group-count estimation statistics
Date: 2005-01-28 21:49:48
Message-ID: 26545.1106948988@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
> Why 10? I'd think we could come up with a slightly less arbitrary number,

Well, it's probably within an order of magnitude of the right thing ;-).
We know we don't want 1, but 100 seems awfully optimistic.

If someone can come up with a more defensible number then I'm all for
it. Greg Stark's thought about a power correction seemed interesting
too, though again far too optimistic to trust without some good math
to back it up.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2005-01-28 21:57:48 Re: Allow GRANT/REVOKE permissions to be applied to all schema objects with one command
Previous Message Tom Lane 2005-01-28 21:45:53 Re: -HEAD on FreeBSD 6-CURRENT build failures