From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com>
cc: Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>,
        Alexander Korotkov <a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru>,
        Mark Dilger <hornschnorter@gmail.com>,
        PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: improving GROUP BY estimation
In-reply-to: 
 <CAEZATCWb4dThbZqEXEB06SU_dbrHe+s1WOgc0+40kzJAGRnD1A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <56CD0381.5060502@2ndquadrant.com>
 <03A3B58D-6A2D-44FE-9B03-E21948CFCBAA@gmail.com>
 <56CFA373.3060105@2ndquadrant.com>
 <7D1A65E8-7ED8-4268-9C24-8EA07E95D2BC@gmail.com>
 <56CFCE96.5080306@2ndquadrant.com>
 <CAPpHfdtEiXqj52kuGMEnw6EShrzj-0tFYwwxPqzdFvxYfCr+tQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <56D867C3.3040309@2ndquadrant.com>
 <904EB795-BCDD-4D68-8D44-274B40C4B2E9@gmail.com>
 <56D88D93.5000509@2ndquadrant.com>
 <CAPpHfdvOBwfGQ_F6Nk+eKF0e2Bx4Z_esg7==8KAjKqP6+5-ahA@mail.gmail.com>
 <E00A6146-D40C-4E4E-92B2-D6F5017F9B19@gmail.com>
 <1457097036.24980.28.camel@2ndquadrant.com>
 <CAEZATCU3hhRjGbvCydP-i3ik4FGX9OcXsK2ZG5TGuVnJOvb=kg@mail.gmail.com>
 <1457906984.27231.16.camel@2ndquadrant.com>
 <715c5c66-5fe1-a9aa-e28d-6c4114ba0fd6@2ndquadrant.com>
 <CAEZATCVd9cACCX_fiFSa0sHiUR5JdzrYL_1N79-PYQe9WSaTWA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPpHfdvcS+NVHW9b8ijJUEt=iCN6F6sLez87QzT0svqd8GgDVg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPpHfdswn19iSnpsukEJiAQSxK63Ewhkae=GDLuWrgvVHRP5jw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEZATCWQ3L8rKsp0+GbO-7D2weYjxZU3668fJx1ZgoVa_QL!
 1LA@mail.gmail.com> <20518.1459451903@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CAEZATCWb4dThbZqEXEB06SU_dbrHe+s1WOgc0+40kzJAGRnD1A@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com>
	message dated "Thu, 31 Mar 2016 21:43:58 +0100"
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 16:59:41 -0400
Message-ID: <7900.1459457981@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org

Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com> writes:
> Yeah, that makes sense. In fact, if we only apply the adjustment when
> reldistinct > 0 and rel->rows < rel->tuples, and rewrite the first
> argument to pow() as (rel->tuples - rel->rows) / rel->tuples, then it
> is guaranteed to be non-negative. If rel->rows >= rel->tuples (not
> sure if it can be greater), then we just want the original
> reldistinct.

Works for me.

			regards, tom lane


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