On Feb 23, 2011, at 3:46 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 12:50 AM, Nathan Boley <npboley(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>> Personally, I think the first thing we ought to do is add a real, bona
>>> fide planner hint to override the selectivity calculation manually,
>>> maybe something like this:
>>> WHERE (x < 5 AND y = 1) SELECTIVITY (0.1);
>> If you're going to go that far, why not just collect statistics on
>> that specific predicate?
>> ie, ANALYZE SELECTIVITY ON tablename (x, y) WHERE (x < 5 AND y = 1);
>> Then it won't fall subject to all of the pitfalls that Tom outlines below.
>> Selectivities are easy to estimate if we know the predicate. They only
>> become hard when they have to work for every possible predicate.
> Fair point.
> Robert Haas
basically we got the idea of allowing "expressions" in cross column stuff. i think this can be very useful. it would fix the problem of a query like that:
SELECT * FROM table WHERE cos(field) = some_number;
this takes a constant fraction of the table which is usually plain wrong as well (and the error tends to multiply inside the plan).
i am just not sure if i have understood all corner cases of that already.
ultimate goal: get it right for join estimates (this is why a syntax extension is definitely needed - you cannot track all of them automatically).
Cybertec Schönig & Schönig GmbH
A-2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Alexander Korotkov||Date: 2011-02-23 15:00:09|
|Subject: WIP: collect frequency statistics for arrays|
|Previous:||From: PostgreSQL - Hans-Jürgen Schönig||Date: 2011-02-23 14:54:11|
|Subject: Re: WIP: cross column correlation ...|