Hi, Tom,
Tom Lane wrote:
> Well, the other thing that's going on here is that we know we are
> overestimating the cost of nestloop-with-inner-indexscan plans.
> The current estimation for that is basically "outer scan cost plus N
> times inner scan cost" where N is the estimated number of outer tuples;
> in other words the repeated indexscan probes are each assumed to happen
> from a cold start. In reality, caching of the upper levels of the index
> means that the later index probes are much cheaper than this model
> thinks. We've known about this for some time but no one's yet proposed
> a more reasonable cost model.
My spontaneus guess would be to use log(N)*inner instead of N*inner. I
don't have any backings for that, it's just what my intuition tells me
as a first shot.
> In my mind this is tied into another issue, which is that the planner
> always costs on the basis of each query starting from zero. In a real
> environment it's much cheaper to use heavily-used indexes than this cost
> model suggests, because they'll already be swapped in due to use by
> previous queries. But we haven't got any infrastructure to keep track
> of what's been heavily used, let alone a cost model that could make use
> of the info.
An easy first approach would be to add a user tunable cache probability
value to each index (and possibly table) between 0 and 1. Then simply
multiply random_page_cost with (1-that value) for each scan.
Later, this value could be automatically tuned by stats analysis or
other means.
> I think part of the reason that people commonly reduce random_page_cost
> to values much lower than physical reality would suggest is that it
> provides a crude way of partially compensating for this basic problem.
I totall agree with this, it's just what we did here from time to time. :-)
Hmm, how does effective_cach_size correspond with it? Shouldn't a high
effective_cache_size have a similar effect?
Thanks,
Markus
--
Markus Schaber | Logical Tracking&Tracing International AG
Dipl. Inf. | Software Development GIS
Fight against software patents in EU! www.ffii.org www.nosoftwarepatents.org