From: | Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Hypothetical indexes using BRIN broken since pg10 |
Date: | 2019-06-27 18:32:56 |
Message-ID: | CAOBaU_YrDOaz1-TGsaA2vgp4OfWYvavHP8BqC9ocMQdozBP1BA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 8:14 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Hi, thanks for the patch.
Thanks for looking at it!
> On 2019-Jun-27, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
>
> > I just realized that 7e534adcdc7 broke support for hypothetical
> > indexes using BRIN am. Attached patch fix the issue.
> >
> > There's no interface to provide the hypothetical pagesPerRange value,
> > so I used the default one, and used simple estimates.
>
> I think it would look nicer to have a routine parallel to brinGetStats()
> (brinGetStatsHypothetical?), instead of polluting selfuncs.c with these
> gory details.
I'm not opposed to it, but I used the same approach as a similar fix
for gincostestimate() (see 7fb008c5ee5). If we add an hypothetical
version of brinGetStats(), we should also do it for ginGetStats().
> This seems back-patchable ...
I definitely hope so!
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrey Borodin | 2019-06-27 18:33:16 | Re: pglz performance |
Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2019-06-27 18:20:35 | Re: Fix doc bug in logical replication. |