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 048AC9DCB8F
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Wed, 22 Mar 2006 12:26:04 -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 86395-04
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Wed, 22 Mar 2006 12:26:02 -0400 (AST)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-
Received: from mail.mnc.ch (62-2-77-205.business.cablecom.ch [62.2.77.205])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 852E69DCC2E
	for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Wed, 22 Mar 2006 12:26:01 -0400 (AST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by mail.mnc.ch (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D91AA82C0;
	Wed, 22 Mar 2006 17:26:09 +0100 (CET)
Received: from mail.mnc.ch ([127.0.0.1])
	by localhost (mail.test.lan [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new,
	port 10025) with ESMTP
	id 08982-08; Wed, 22 Mar 2006 17:26:08 +0100 (CET)
Received: from meuh.mnc.lan (62-2-77-204.business.cablecom.ch [62.2.77.204])
	by mail.mnc.ch (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6227A82B9;
	Wed, 22 Mar 2006 17:26:08 +0100 (CET)
Received: by meuh.mnc.lan (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id 3C8E61836BA; Wed, 22 Mar 2006 17:25:56 +0100 (CET)
To: Scott Marlowe <smarlowe@g2switchworks.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: planner with index scan cost way off actual cost,
References: <87ek11gz69.fsf@meuh.mnc.lan> <441CDAAA.20609@paradise.net.nz>
	<87d5ghms3h.fsf@meuh.mnc.lan> <20060321095049.GW15742@pervasive.com>
	<441FD82D.1040509@paradise.net.nz>
	<20060321115100.GM15742@pervasive.com> <87acbkkl0o.fsf@meuh.mnc.lan>
	<20060321174903.GG15742@pervasive.com> <87slpaj46q.fsf@meuh.mnc.lan>
	<1143044174.17999.7.camel@state.g2switchworks.com>
X-Hashcash: 
 1:20:060322:smarlowe@g2switchworks.com::A59U6pkpHtXwDw3a:0000000000000000000000000000000000029Ba
X-Hashcash: 
 1:20:060322:pgsql-performance@postgresql.org::KH3+AfmfPPKfTURi:00000000000000000000000000000178I
From: Guillaume Cottenceau <gc@mnc.ch>
Date: 22 Mar 2006 17:25:56 +0100
In-Reply-To: <1143044174.17999.7.camel@state.g2switchworks.com>
Message-ID: <87irq6e99n.fsf@meuh.mnc.lan>
Lines: 36
User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mnc.ch
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.105 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.105]
X-Spam-Score: 0.105
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200603/462
X-Sequence-Number: 17899

Hi Scott,

Scott Marlowe <smarlowe 'at' g2switchworks.com> writes:

> On Wed, 2006-03-22 at 02:04, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:

[...]

> > Yes, we use 7.4.5 actually, because "it just works", so production
> > wants to first deal with all the things that don't work before
> > upgrading. I have recently discovered about the background writer
> > of 8.x which could be a supplementary reason to push for an
> > ugprade though.
> 
> Imagine you get a call from the manufacturer of your car.  There's a
> problem with the fuel pump, and, in a small percentage of accidents,
> your car could catch fire and kill everyone inside.
> 
> Do you go in for the recall, or ignore it because you just want your car
> to "just work?"

Ah, this holy computer/OS/whatever-to-cars comparison.. How many
million electrons would the world save if computer people would
abandon it? :)

> In the case of the third number in postgresql releases, that's what
> you're talking about.  the updates that have come after the 7.4.5
> version, just talking 7.4 series here, have included a few crash and
> data loss fixes.  Rare, but possible.

I guess we didn't know that. I for myself have (a bit more)
excuses because I'm on the development side :) But I've passed
the information to the operation team, thank you.

-- 
Guillaume Cottenceau