Re: distinct estimate of a hard-coded VALUES list
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: distinct estimate of a hard-coded VALUES list |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 25962.1471555512@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение |
| Ответ на | distinct estimate of a hard-coded VALUES list (Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: distinct estimate of a hard-coded VALUES list
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com> writes:
> So even though it knows that 6952 values have been shoved in the bottom, it
> thinks only 200 are going to come out of the aggregation. This seems like
> a really lousy estimate. In more complex queries than the example one
> given it leads to poor planning choices.
> Is the size of the input list not available to the planner at the point
> where it estimates the distinct size of the input list? I'm assuming that
> if it is available to EXPLAIN than it is available to the planner. Does it
> know how large the input list is, but just throw up its hands and use 200
> as the distinct size anyway?
It does know it, what it doesn't know is how many duplicates there are.
If we do what I think you're suggesting, which is assume the entries are
all distinct, I'm afraid we'll just move the estimation problems somewhere
else.
I recall some talk of actually running an ANALYZE-like process on the
elements of a VALUES list, but it seemed like overkill at the time and
still does.
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: