> Not sure what you mean here. I'm not speaking of the brin index am, I > mean the get_index_stats_hook call which you've added.
I see. Actually this part was from Alvaro. I haven't noticed the get_index_stats_hook call before, but it is still the same coding as btcostestimate(). btcostestimate() also calls get_index_stats_hook, and then Asserts nnumbers == 1. > hmm, before what exactly? before your patch it didn't exist. You > introduced it into brincostestimate(). I confused by looking at my changes on my repository I made on top of Alvaro's. I will rename it on the next version. > At the very least please write a comment to explain this in the code. > Right now it looks broken. If I noticed this then one day in the > future someone else will. If you write a comment then person of the > future will likely read it, and then not raise any questions about the > otherwise questionable code. Will do. > I do strongly agree that the estimates need improved here. I've > personally had issues with bad brin estimates before, and I'd like to > see it improved. I think the patch is not quite complete without it > also considering stats on expression indexes. If you have time to go > do that I'd suggest you go ahead with that. I will look into it this week. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers