Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jEFfi-0008Cb-5H for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 17:06:30 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1jEFej-0007kY-0z for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 17:05:29 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1jEFei-0007kQ-Oh for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 17:05:28 +0000 Received: from mail-wr1-x429.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::429]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jEFef-0008VH-Fb for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 17:05:28 +0000 Received: by mail-wr1-x429.google.com with SMTP id t2so16639398wrx.12 for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 10:05:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=2ndquadrant-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=iz8vLonWV7ADzVYCxNXCEH5wZekbG9oGdHCAUFBXBtI=; b=HeyCVRjAhyagwRGhJJm0VwKp1PILfg4GeKcU6aY6teLgY9d7YtuDfOs1T0o/12xb4L JhNA0/iLRMDPKPY7hP1INpEYj+1k1zNm02pF7pFXicRyVa+JcDlfBeH+4MDVESCN4oTY xPvvVl4Ko14946htZKw3sXradF7pO/fmqRIAKS1oF1Jq3vgXZZBEy/AzGMBxnlj7mynm pOp7g33b8O8byK0lORlPcZ8C9QstVr2WlapGbpirHW9qZiqWfy+EL/cQHIfSpyUOe9N9 yGlwtn2S09hyrWSYXUmLjcHJ2t5BCd25pUBciAQ1IqJm5xdk6zuOsK01lqZXefRn05bj NLaw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=iz8vLonWV7ADzVYCxNXCEH5wZekbG9oGdHCAUFBXBtI=; b=aaJAfNENk3bz0KOaiKF2W8qlNpBrlR/9Xy3VGlspXhtUSgUh3Wvts9DFk7jNooBTqU J9ZBs/93t5L9u3anm2beKOWqb3jd7f0vjGKcXq2GFz8DhJNvKg9OMyE2tymtl25z6fJf cUwokK1oulX5x6mSNX7Jp8JzYnhbOdm9CVbISnWb7vFJJvpmlsvLeeSlHT7HqU6vxYWe Mk9Ef4ljy02H3cyPN0Q3I0Kgy/krjW5fJZCkbkw9K3q6kdx3tHhJkxr+NYNjkG+sMdsP a/GemrFUh4UgOF3tfNpr7FTymNOjyaYhCBhSprzfovnMF7TGJ09dBoVtKp2kMVjOMOwn 1Xtg== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ1e1a7Ur/0esvt8jZVdaGiopc8v7Ycng6LU/EQhq2YB/GUVRcGS fF5Bo2qXns+2AAnr01P+LWFVPg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vv2liJCn5R/1JKdLRRfeqxWLbUaO9vVrc0jjB1bGz3/EOPqCUhVNy/OyzgsCwh8YTN9ZKceIQ== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:6287:: with SMTP id k7mr6649239wru.195.1584464723355; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 10:05:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (ip-86-49-253-92.net.upcbroadband.cz. [86.49.253.92]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w19sm63955wmc.22.2020.03.17.10.05.21 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 17 Mar 2020 10:05:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2020 18:05:17 +0100 From: Tomas Vondra To: Dean Rasheed Cc: Pierre Ducroquet , PostgreSQL Hackers Subject: Re: PATCH: add support for IN and @> in functional-dependency statistics use Message-ID: <20200317170517.hutarq3sioyny3wa@development> References: <20200202184134.swoqkqlqorqolrqv@development> <20200312173047.stp55sxoj4sipn7q@development> <20200313160944.aqrbkyf7tkasoxfk@development> <20200314152159.5webesf6pfluatqj@development> <20200314184535.4jgkxcyg5yprvsra@development> <20200317153706.z6pdtijr25iyr424@development> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 04:14:26PM +0000, Dean Rasheed wrote: >On Tue, 17 Mar 2020 at 15:37, Tomas Vondra wrote: >> >> On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 12:42:52PM +0000, Dean Rasheed wrote: >> >> >The other thing that I'm still concerned about is the possibility of >> >returning estimates with P(a,b) > P(a) or P(b). I think that such a >> >thing becomes much more likely with the new types of clause supported >> >here, because they now allow multiple values from each column, where >> >before we only allowed one. I took another look at the patch I posted >> >on the other thread, and I've convinced myself that it's correct. >> >Attached is an updated version, with some cosmetic tidying up and now >> >with some additional regression tests. >> >> Yeah, I agree that's something we need to fix. Do you plan to push the >> fix, or do you want me to do it? >> > >I can push it. Have you had a chance to review it? > Not yet, I'll take a look today. regards -- Tomas Vondra http://www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services