|From:||Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>|
|To:||Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>|
|Cc:||Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>|
|Subject:||Re: postgres_fdw: using TABLESAMPLE to collect remote sample|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> I we want to improve sampling for partitioned cases (where the foreign
> table is just one of many partitions), I think we'd have to rework how
> we determine sample size for each partition. Now we simply calculate
> that from relpages, which seems quite fragile (different amounts of
> bloat, different tuple densities) and somewhat strange for FDW serves
> that don't use the same "page" concept.
> So it may easily happen we determine bogus sample sizes for each
> partition. The difficulties when calculating the sample_frac is just a
> secondary issue.
> OTOH the concept of a "row" seems way more general, so perhaps
> acquire_inherited_sample_rows should use reltuples, and if we want to do
> correction it should happen at this stage already.
Yeah, there's definitely something to be said for changing that to be
based on rowcount estimates instead of physical size. I think it's
a matter for a different patch though, and not a reason to hold up
regards, tom lane
|Next Message||Martin Kalcher||2022-07-19 20:20:57||Re: [PATCH] Introduce array_shuffle() and array_sample()|
|Previous Message||Tom Lane||2022-07-19 19:23:57||Re: Convert planner's AggInfo and AggTransInfo to Nodes|