Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.184]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D09382E018B for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2008 14:25:38 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.184]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 43392-04 for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2008 14:25:36 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5 Received: from gauss.credativ.com (gauss.credativ.com [212.112.227.254]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F37C72E0142 for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2008 14:25:37 -0400 (AST) Received: from hawking.credativ.lan (exit.credativ.com [87.139.82.80]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gauss.credativ.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DC8E7753C for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2008 19:25:31 +0100 (CET) From: Peter Eisentraut To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Subject: Maximum statistics target Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 19:25:25 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200803071925.26532.peter_e@gmx.net> X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200803/189 X-Sequence-Number: 114990 Related to the concurrent discussion about selectivity estimations ... What is the reason the statistics target is limited to 1000? I've seen more than one case where increasing the statistics target to 1000 improved results and one would have wanted to increase it further. What's the problem with setting it to ten million if I have ten million values in the table and I am prepared to spend the resources to maintain those statistics?