From: 静安寺 <asen_huang@qq.com>
To: tv <tv@fuzzy.cz>
Cc: pgsql-performance <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Cc: tgl <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Subject: Re: Why dose the planner select one bad scan plan.
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 15:03:45 +0800
Message-ID: <tencent_7D7D734B000FD7EA1CF49B10@qq.com> (raw)
Thanks for your answer! And I am sorry for trading the question as a bug, and send it to 'bugs' mailing-list.
But I doubt your answer. I think the essence of the problem is when the planner selects 'Bitmap Index Scan' and how the planner computes the cost of 'Bitmap Index Scan'.
Tom Lane said “In principle a bitmap index scan should be significantly faster if the index can return the bitmap more or less "natively" rather than having to construct it. My recollection though is that a significant amount of work is needed to make that happen, and that there is no existing patch that tackled the problem. So I'm not sure that this report should be taken as indicating that there's no chance of a SELECT performance improvement. What it does say is that we have to do that work if we want to make bitmap indexes useful.”
Okay, I want to know how the planner computes the cost of constructing bitmap. And when the planner computes the cost of 'Bitmap Index Scan', if it considers the influence of memory cache? As when I do not clear the memory cache, I find the 'Bitmap Index Scan' is real fast than 'Seq Scan'.
Best Regards!
Asen
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-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: asen_huang@qq.com, tv@fuzzy.cz, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us
Subject: Re: Why dose the planner select one bad scan plan.
In-Reply-To: <tencent_7D7D734B000FD7EA1CF49B10@qq.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