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

Re: performance of IN (subquery)

From: "Arthur Ward" <award-postgresql(at)dominionsciences(dot)com>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: performance of IN (subquery)
Date: 2004-08-27 02:14:15
Message-ID: 5457.24.98.133.164.1093572855.squirrel@alpha.dominionsciences.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general
> Afterthought: It would be nice if the database was smart enough to
> analyze a table of its own accord when a sequential scan returns more
> than, say, 20 times what it was supposed to.

I've wondered on several occasions if there is any good reason for PG not
to automatically perform an analyze concurrently with a seq scan as it's
happening. That way, no extra disk IO is needed and the stats could say
up-to-date for almost free.

Any hackers around who can say why this might be a bad idea, or is it one
of those things that just needs a volunteer? (I'm not; at least not now.)

In response to

Responses

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: JoelDate: 2004-08-27 02:51:29
Subject: Re: UTF-8 and LIKE vs =
Previous:From: CSNDate: 2004-08-27 01:56:17
Subject: Re: owner orphaned databases

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