X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFB0A9DC82D for ; Thu, 15 Dec 2005 01:36:29 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 85881-04 for ; Thu, 15 Dec 2005 01:36:28 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7ECE39DC804 for ; Thu, 15 Dec 2005 01:36:27 -0400 (AST) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id jBF5aKYL010012; Thu, 15 Dec 2005 00:36:20 -0500 (EST) To: "Gregory S. Williamson" cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org, "PostGIS Users Discussion" Subject: Re: [postgis-users] Is my query planner failing me, or vice versa? In-reply-to: <71E37EF6B7DCC1499CEA0316A2568328024BBCD3@loki.wc.globexplorer.net> References: <71E37EF6B7DCC1499CEA0316A2568328024BBCD3@loki.wc.globexplorer.net> Comments: In-reply-to "Gregory S. Williamson" message dated "Wed, 14 Dec 2005 16:23:47 -0800" Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 00:36:20 -0500 Message-ID: <10011.1134624980@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.002 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.002] X-Spam-Score: 0.002 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200512/349 X-Sequence-Number: 16170 "Gregory S. Williamson" writes: > Forgive the cross-posting, but I found myself wondering if might not > be some way future way of telling the planner that a given table > (column ?) has a high likelyhood of being TOASTed. What would you expect the planner to do with the information, exactly? We could certainly cause ANALYZE to record some estimate of this, but I'm not too clear on what happens after that... regards, tom lane