| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: ANALYZE sampling is too good |
| Date: | 2013-12-10 20:00:49 |
| Message-ID: | CA+U5nM+vNd=10yYUuyNe9uA+Nh9mED=bbsjpU68nUUFT=ZTSVA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 10 December 2013 19:54, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
> On 12/10/2013 11:49 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 11:23 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> I don't think that anyone believes that not doing block sampling is
>> tenable, fwiw. Clearly some type of block sampling would be preferable
>> for most or all purposes.
>
> As discussed, we need math though. Does anyone have an ACM subscription
> and time to do a search? Someone must. We can buy one with community
> funds, but no reason to do so if we don't have to.
We already have that, just use Vitter's algorithm at the block level
rather than the row level.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2013-12-10 20:17:43 | Re: ANALYZE sampling is too good |
| Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2013-12-10 19:59:29 | Re: ANALYZE sampling is too good |