Re: [PERFORM] Slow query: bitmap scan troubles
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>, Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2013-01-14T16:45:01Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers, pgsql-performance
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 8:07 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Comments? I'm not sure I have anything intelligent to add to this conversation - does that make me the wisest of all the Greeks? - but I do think it worth mentioning that I have heard occasional reports within EDB of the query planner refusing to use extremely large indexes no matter how large a hammer was applied. I have never been able to obtain enough details to understand the parameters of the problem, let alone reproduce it, but I thought it might be worth mentioning anyway in case it's both real and related to the case at hand. Basically I guess that boils down to: it would be good to consider whether the costing model is correct for an index of, say, 1TB. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
Commits
-
Tweak genericcostestimate's fudge factor for index size.
- bf01e34b556f 9.3.0 cited
-
Tweak index costing for problems with partial indexes.
- 21a39de5809c 9.2.0 cited