On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 11:09 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 4:58 PM, Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> wrote:
>> The size hint I chose is fairly arbitrary. Any suggestions for principled
>> alternatives?
>
> Based on your test results, it doesn't seem like it matters very much
> what you put in there, so I'm inclined to think that num_mcelem is
> fine. I thought about maybe allowing for a little slop, like
> num_mcelem * 10, but maybe the way you did it is better. It's
> possible that people will set ridiculously overblown stats targets on
> some columns, and that's certainly going to cost something no matter
> what we do, but there's no point in making that worse than it has to
> be without some clear reason for doing so.
Hearing no further comments, I have committed your patch.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
