| From: | Ken Geis <kgeis(at)speakeasy(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Sean Chittenden <sean(at)chittenden(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: bad estimates |
| Date: | 2003-08-29 16:56:59 |
| Message-ID: | 3F4F85DB.2030402@speakeasy.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Sean Chittenden wrote:
>>I found I'm suffering from an effect detailed in a previous thread titled
>>
>> Does "correlation" mislead the optimizer on large tables?
>
>
> I don't know about large tables, but this is a big problem and
> something I'm going to spend some time validating later today. I
> think Manfred's patch is pretty good and certainly better than where
> we are but I haven't used it yet to see if it's the magic ticket for
> many of these index problems.
I had to dig through a lot of archives to find this. Is this the patch,
from last October?
http://members.aon.at/pivot/pg/16-correlation.diff
If so, I'll try it out and report my results.
Ken
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Richard Ellis | 2003-08-29 16:58:51 | Re: Indexing question |
| Previous Message | Sean Chittenden | 2003-08-29 16:36:13 | Re: bad estimates |