References: <878r2zeqsp.fsf@163.com>
 <CAApHDvq9QWL6az9veW1-HaW4LwGenW0V8YyKXFLZYoaF_4AQ+Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <87r0gqcjno.fsf@163.com>
 <CAApHDvr6Dv-oHN3qn3t9Z3QHLT0qi80fa_tRNmmjG8r9BhzoHA@mail.gmail.com>
 <87le6xb5j9.fsf@163.com> <87bk7sbzaj.fsf@163.com>
 <CAApHDvo5S5xqWQR1HKzx=5UpBr1ZKhwEtxEkt=3q0z4oR+TnPA@mail.gmail.com>
 <87msra9vgo.fsf@163.com>
 <CAApHDvrhKaeFzw7KczR13s=3OOb7SSjLHM7-cBpp492=0P9RSA@mail.gmail.com>
User-agent: mu4e 1.10.7; emacs 29.1
From: Andy Fan <zhihuifan1213@163.com>
To: David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>,
 pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: a wrong index choose when statistics is out of date
Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2024 17:45:54 +0800
In-reply-to: 
 <CAApHDvrhKaeFzw7KczR13s=3OOb7SSjLHM7-cBpp492=0P9RSA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <87edcl9hlu.fsf@163.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/87edcl9hlu.fsf%40163.com>
Precedence: bulk


David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> writes:

> On Thu, 7 Mar 2024 at 23:40, Andy Fan <zhihuifan1213@163.com> wrote:
>>
>> David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> writes:
>> > If you don't want the planner to use the statistics for the column why
>> > not just do the following?
>>
>> Acutally I didn't want the planner to ignore the statistics totally, I
>> want the planner to treat the "Const" which probably miss optimizer part
>> average, which is just like what we did for generic plan for the blow
>> query.
>
> I'm with Andrei on this one and agree with his "And it is just luck
> that you've got the right answer".

Any example to support this conclusion? and what's the new problem after
this?

-- 
Best Regards
Andy Fan