X-Original-To: pgsql-benchmarks-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92EBC9DCAEF; Sun, 11 Dec 2005 16:41:48 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 31843-07; Sun, 11 Dec 2005 16:41:49 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6698A9DCB82; Sun, 11 Dec 2005 16:41:46 -0400 (AST) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id jBBKfacv018707; Sun, 11 Dec 2005 15:41:36 -0500 (EST) To: Josh Berkus cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, "Anjan Kumar. A." , pgsql-chat@postgresql.org, pgsql-benchmarks@postgresql.org, pgsql-docs@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [DOCS] [HACKERS] Please Help: PostgreSQL Query Optimizer In-reply-to: <200512111126.18566.josh@agliodbs.com> References: <200512111126.18566.josh@agliodbs.com> Comments: In-reply-to Josh Berkus message dated "Sun, 11 Dec 2005 11:26:18 -0800" Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 15:41:36 -0500 Message-ID: <18706.1134333696@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.003 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.003] X-Spam-Score: 0.003 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200512/2 X-Sequence-Number: 48 Josh Berkus writes: > I don't see why you're increasing the various cpu_* costs. You missed the point Josh --- these numbers are relative to the cost of a page fetch, so if page fetch is measured in microseconds instead of milliseconds, then you *do* want to bump the CPU costs up. regards, tom lane