Re: benchmarking the query planner - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: benchmarking the query planner
Date
Msg-id 10073.1229022392@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: benchmarking the query planner  ("Vladimir Sitnikov" <sitnikov.vladimir@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: benchmarking the query planner  ("Vladimir Sitnikov" <sitnikov.vladimir@gmail.com>)
Re: benchmarking the query planner  ("Robert Haas" <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
"Vladimir Sitnikov" <sitnikov.vladimir@gmail.com> writes:
> Do you consider using hash tables?

Doubt it's really worth it, unless there's some way to amortize the
setup cost across multiple selectivity estimations; which would surely
complicate life.

One thing that just now occurred to me is that as long as we maintain
the convention that MCV lists are in decreasing frequency order, one can
take any prefix of the list and it's a perfectly good MCV list of less
resolution.  So one way to reduce the time taken in eqjoinsel is to set
an upper limit on the number of entries considered *by that routine*,
whereas other estimator functions could use larger lists.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Vladimir Sitnikov"
Date:
Subject: Re: benchmarking the query planner
Next
From: "Robert Haas"
Date:
Subject: Re: benchmarking the query planner