Re: Bloom index cost model seems to be wrong

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Kellerer <spam_eater(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>, Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
Subject: Re: Bloom index cost model seems to be wrong
Date: 2019-09-26 07:00:12
Message-ID: 20190926070012.GC2448@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance

On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 05:12:26PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> It's not clear to me what the next action should be on this patch. I
> think Jeff got some feedback from Tom, but was that enough to expect a
> new version to be posted? That was in February; should we now (in late
> September) close this as Returned with Feedback?

That sounds rather right to me.
--
Michael

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Konstantin Knizhnik 2019-09-26 07:05:23 Re: Global temporary tables
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2019-09-26 06:56:46 Re: PostgreSQL12 and older versions of OpenSSL

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joao Junior 2019-09-26 07:54:40 Analyze on slave promoted.
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2019-09-25 20:12:26 Re: Bloom index cost model seems to be wrong