Re: [HACKERS] Surjective functional indexes

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
To: Konstantin Knizhnik <k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Surjective functional indexes
Date: 2017-12-14 21:15:53
Message-ID: 20171214211553.ijxfd4p52nz7qg44@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Konstantin Knizhnik wrote:

> If you still thing that additional 16 bytes per relation in statistic is too
> high overhead, then I will also remove autotune.

I think it's pretty clear that these additional bytes are excessive.

Álvaro Herrera
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2017-12-14 21:46:10 Re: [HACKERS] Assertion failure when the non-exclusive pg_stop_backup aborted.
Previous Message Jeff Janes 2017-12-14 21:05:33 Re: Top-N sorts verses parallelism