On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 11:23 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> However, these things presume that we need to continue scanning most
> of the blocks of the table, which I don't think needs to be the case.
> There is a better way.
Do they? I think it's one opportunistic way of ameliorating the cost.
> Back in 2005/6, I advocated a block sampling method, as described by
> Chaudri et al (ref?)
I don't think that anyone believes that not doing block sampling is
tenable, fwiw. Clearly some type of block sampling would be preferable
for most or all purposes.
--
Peter Geoghegan
