Tom Lane wrote:
> Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com> writes:
>> ...bitmap cost estimates didn't also change much....
> By definition, a bitmap scan's cost isn't affected by index order
No? I think I understand that for index scans the correlation
influenced how many data pages are estimated to get sucked in.
Wouldn't a bitmap scan using a single index also fetch roughly
the same number of data pages as an index scan?
I'm not complaining, since 8.3's doing great on all my real-world
queries. And sorry for my naive questions - feel free to tell
me to just read the code if this is something I should be able
to figure out myself.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Jeff Davis||Date: 2008-10-27 17:41:26|
|Subject: Re: array_agg and array_accum (patch)|
|Previous:||From: Simon Riggs||Date: 2008-10-27 17:16:11|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Hot Standby utility and administrator functions|