Re: Fix gin index cost estimation - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Ronan Dunklau
Subject Re: Fix gin index cost estimation
Date
Msg-id 12071145.O9o76ZdvQC@aivenronan
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Fix gin index cost estimation  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Responses Re: Fix gin index cost estimation
List pgsql-hackers
> > You're right, I was too eager to try to raise the CPU cost proportionnally 
to
> > the number of array scans (scalararrayop). I'd really like to understand 
where
> > this equation comes from though...
> 
> So, what's the latest update here?

Thanks Michael for reviving this thread.

Before proceeding any further with this, I'd like to understand where we 
stand. Tom argued my way of charging cost per entry pages visited boils down 
to charging per tuple, which I expressed disagreement with. 

If we can come to a consensus whether that's a bogus way of thinking about it 
I'll proceed with what we agree on.

-- 
Ronan Dunklau





pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: future of serial and identity columns
Next
From: Masahiko Sawada
Date:
Subject: Re: Add index scan progress to pg_stat_progress_vacuum