Re: Re: Missing rows with index scan when collation is not "C" (PostgreSQL 9.5) - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Re: Missing rows with index scan when collation is not "C" (PostgreSQL 9.5)
Date
Msg-id 12340.1458756836@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Re: Missing rows with index scan when collation is not "C" (PostgreSQL 9.5)  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>)
List pgsql-bugs
Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com> writes:
> What about the existing caller of strxfrm(), convert_string_datum()?

convert_string_datum is, and always has been, used only for planner
estimation purposes.  We do not care if it sometimes gets inaccurate
answers.  Even if it's as wrong as it can possibly be, that will only
affect planner estimates to the extent of wrongly interpolating between
the endpoints of a histogram bin, so that the effects are no worse than
about 1/statistics_target.  And there are bigger limitations on the
accuracy of those estimates anyway, notably that we use the same stats
regardless of the collation that applies to a particular WHERE-clause
operator.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: Magnus Hagander
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: Missing rows with index scan when collation is not "C" (PostgreSQL 9.5)
Next
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: Missing rows with index scan when collation is not "C" (PostgreSQL 9.5)