Re: Bloom index cost model seems to be wrong

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Thomas Kellerer <spam_eater(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Bloom index cost model seems to be wrong
Date: 2019-02-12 15:41:58
Message-ID: 2126.1549986118@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance

Thomas Kellerer <spam_eater(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> The bloom index is only used if either Seq Scan is disabled or if the random_page_cost is set to 1 (anything about 1 triggers a Seq Scan on my Windows laptop).

Hm. blcostestimate is using the default cost calculation, except for

/* We have to visit all index tuples anyway */
costs.numIndexTuples = index->tuples;

which essentially tells genericcostestimate to assume that every index
tuple will be visited. This obviously is going to increase the cost
estimate; maybe there's something wrong with that?

I notice that the bloom regression test script is only testing queries
where it forces the choice of plan type, so it really doesn't prove
anything about whether the cost estimates are sane.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Stark 2019-02-12 16:00:51 Should we still have old release notes in docs?
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2019-02-12 15:26:22 Re: use Getopt::Long for catalog scripts

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeff Janes 2019-02-12 16:58:08 Re: Bloom index cost model seems to be wrong
Previous Message Thomas Kellerer 2019-02-12 15:08:25 Bloom index cost model seems to be wrong