Re: benchmarking the query planner

From: Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, "jd\(at)commandprompt(dot)com" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, "Greg Smith" <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: benchmarking the query planner
Date: 2008-12-11 22:48:37
Message-ID: 877i66tjju.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:

> 500 114.076
> 600 157.535
> 700 211.189
> 800 269.731
> 900 335.427
> 1000 409.638
>...
> BTW, does anyone have an opinion about changing the upper limit for
> default_stats_target to, say, 10000? These tests suggest that you
> wouldn't want such a value for a column used as a join key, but
> I can see a possible argument for high values in text search and
> similar applications.

I don't like the existing arbitrary limit which it sounds like people are
really bumping into. But that curve looks like it might be getting awfully
steep. I wonder just how long 10,000 would take?

--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Get trained by Bruce Momjian - ask me about EnterpriseDB's PostgreSQL training!

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2008-12-11 22:56:57 Re: benchmarking the query planner
Previous Message Vladimir Sitnikov 2008-12-11 22:47:08 Re: benchmarking the query planner