>>> On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 8:13 PM, in message
<d6d6637f0801301813n64fa58eu76385cf8a621907@mail.gmail.com>, "Christopher
Browne" <cbbrowne@gmail.com> wrote:
> There seems to be *plenty* of evidence out there that the performance
> penalty would NOT be "essentially zero."
I can confirm that I have had performance tank because of boosting
the statistics target for selected columns. It appeared to be time
spent in the planning phase, not a bad plan choice. Reducing the
numbers restored decent performance.
-Kevin
