pg.ddx.io  pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@vmware.com>
To: Thom Brown <thom@linux.com>
Cc: Tomas Vondra <tv@fuzzy.cz>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Cc: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: GIN improvements part2: fast scan
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 15:55:26 +0300
Message-ID: <5425623E.3030502@vmware.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAA-aLv7vfRX1WJoh-AyotOBV4WMNY8P3z1ZWvGeMk0255OYR_A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPpHfdvftaJq7www381naLw1=4u0h+qpXgWvNhcEB9HMVywbGg@mail.gmail.com>
	<52E4AA3A.9000607@fuzzy.cz>
	<52E53458.2010106@vmware.com>
	<CAPpHfdticvY2+RGTxzQdrr4YSQie+vYGRDRBTuG1ZxBmjwGrOA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPpHfduivz3MOA8_o+44n_Z0P-n+WCW=K1DrH+-g3gb-cbM2aA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPpHfdtDfQ1ycU0oh650uB5ND4+OY-enbfkweGWzXryCWD4UZA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPpHfdv792ZSWt_Tk+GzzsoNwm7ZGyomfrRiF7WuFN22LUVNUQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPpHfdtSuSoZS4SwYQu4Rc8NOwDHoX3DsLGaxJF9HZ6gW0TdVA@mail.gmail.com>
	<52F36245.6070006@vmware.com>
	<CAPpHfdvMvEGXXUO0hpj=SU1tbVTpg1cP6kXjkyDqZpOD_9o7zQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<52F4E094.9040303@vmware.com>
	<CAPpHfdsMac=yQkkMi+HPN96EiCjvE1wBt9tveENq0tjti3r88w@mail.gmail.com>
	<5305CF6E.1080508@vmware.com>
	<CAPpHfdvUmurpcqQ83vWr-SKAdWzrOMxH+_XDQ-A=9bQTpjrnxg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPpHfdu18R9AG8-a_fB-eD2vpWtaydidM9TyRVFVY67R=SP7og@mail.gmail.com>
	<531F8994.3040008@fuzzy.cz>
	<53208B4D.5000806@vmware.com>
	<CAA-aLv7vfRX1WJoh-AyotOBV4WMNY8P3z1ZWvGeMk0255OYR_A@mail.gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>

On 09/25/2014 09:05 PM, Thom Brown wrote:
> On 12 March 2014 16:29, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@vmware.com> wrote:
>> Good point. We have done two major changes to GIN in this release cycle:
>> changed the data page format and made it possible to skip items without
>> fetching all the keys ("fast scan"). gincostestimate doesn't know about
>> either change.
>
> Did this cost estimation issue get fixed?

Nope.

> If not, and if this is due for 9.5, can this be removed from the 9.4 open items list?

Removed and moved to the TODO list. It's a pity, but no-one seems to 
have a great idea on what to do about the cost estimation, nor interest 
in working on it.

- Heikki



-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers



view thread (90+ messages)

Message-ID: <5425623E.3030502@vmware.com>
Permalink:  ../5425623E.3030502@vmware.com/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/5425623E.3030502@vmware.com

 · 

reply
Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
  Cc: hlinnakangas@vmware.com, thom@linux.com, tv@fuzzy.cz, aekorotkov@gmail.com
  Subject: Re: GIN improvements part2: fast scan
  In-Reply-To: <5425623E.3030502@vmware.com>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox