Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [HACKERS] Big IN() clauses etc : feature proposal

From: Markus Schaber <schabi(at)logix-tt(dot)com>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Big IN() clauses etc : feature proposal
Date: 2006-05-10 15:59:26
Message-ID: 44620DDE.1080500@logix-tt.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-performance
Hi, Nils,

Nis Jorgensen wrote:

> It will probably be quite common for the number to depend on the number
> of rows in other tables. Even if this is fairly constant within one db
> (some assumption), it is likely to be different in others using the same
> function definition. Perhaps a better solution would be to cache the
> result of the estimator function.

Sophisticated estimator functions are free to use the pg_statistics
views for their row count estimation.


HTH,
Markus
-- 
Markus Schaber | Logical Tracking&Tracing International AG
Dipl. Inf.     | Software Development GIS

Fight against software patents in EU! www.ffii.org www.nosoftwarepatents.org

In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Bruno Wolff IIIDate: 2006-05-10 18:10:51
Subject: Re: UNSUBSCRIBE
Previous:From: meDate: 2006-05-10 15:45:37
Subject: Re: in memory views

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Gurjeet SinghDate: 2006-05-10 16:10:57
Subject: Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error
Previous:From: Fabien COELHODate: 2006-05-10 15:41:30
Subject: Re: bug? non working casts for domain

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group