Re: Abbreviated keys for Numeric - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Geoghegan
Subject Re: Abbreviated keys for Numeric
Date
Msg-id CAM3SWZRre+ryKWDDCuxHyTC-5ZSVqfvbCa1V8GUr=7N1kT2v-w@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Abbreviated keys for Numeric  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 2:09 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com> wrote:
> I can recreate the problem you see with text sort regressions.
> Abbreviation is aborted for the case in question, unsurprisingly, and
> fairly far in. With that many tuples, the idea of taking abbreviated
> cardinality as a proxy for full cardinality becomes less important,
> because either way you have to do at least 10 comparisons per item on
> average.

Actually, it's closer to 20 comparisons past 1 million, on average.
See my earlier 0002-* patch comments [1].

[1] http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/attachment/35861/0002-Estimate-total-number-of-rows-to-be-sorted.patch
(search for "20")
-- 
Peter Geoghegan



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: Abbreviated keys for Numeric
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Bootstrap DATA is a pita