Re: Possible mistake in 'Using EXPLAIN' section

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От James Shaw
Тема Re: Possible mistake in 'Using EXPLAIN' section
Дата
Msg-id c4a5ac250710100551y51a93372u22e2eba612faf164@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Possible mistake in 'Using EXPLAIN' section  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: Possible mistake in 'Using EXPLAIN' section  ("James Shaw" <js102@zepler.net>)
Список pgsql-docs
On 10/10/2007, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> "James Shaw" <js102@zepler.net> writes:
> > The example given has "Seq Scan on tenk1 (cost=0.00..458.00" in the example,
> > but then says, "you will find out that tenk1 has 358 disk pages" and "the
> > cost is estimated at 358 page reads".  Shouldn't this be 458 disk page
> > reads?
>
> No.  Why did you stop reading in mid-sentence?

I'm sorry, I misunderstood.  I've reread, and understand where the
extra 100 comes from now.  Perhaps this could be reworded:

This is about as straightforward as it gets.  If you do
SELECT relpages, reltuples FROM pg_class WHERE relname = 'tenk1';

you will find out that tenk1 has 358 disk pages and 10000 rows.  The
estimated cost is (disk pages read * seq_page_cost) + (number of rows
read * cpu_tuple_cost).  By default, seq_page_cost is 1.0 and
cpu_tuple_cost is 0.01.  Therefore, the estimated cost is (358 * 1.0)
+ (10000 * 0.01) = 458.

Thanks
James

В списке pgsql-docs по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Possible mistake in 'Using EXPLAIN' section
Следующее
От: Guillaume Lelarge
Дата:
Сообщение: Last patch