On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 11:23 AM, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > However, these things presume that we need to continue scanning most > of the blocks of the table, which I don't think needs to be the case. > There is a better way.
Do they? I think it's one opportunistic way of ameliorating the cost. > Back in 2005/6, I advocated a block sampling method, as described by > Chaudri et al (ref?) I don't think that anyone believes that not doing block sampling is tenable, fwiw. Clearly some type of block sampling would be preferable for most or all purposes. -- Peter Geoghegan -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
