On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 4:17 AM, Cédric Villemain <cedric.villemain.deb...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> I think his point is that we already have a proven formula >>> (Mackert-Lohmann) and shouldn't be inventing a new one out of thin air. >>> The problem is to figure out what numbers to apply the M-L formula to. >>> >>> I've been thinking that we ought to try to use it in the context of the >>> query as a whole rather than for individual table scans; the current >>> usage already has some of that flavor but we haven't taken it to the >>> logical conclusion. >> >> Is there a TODO here? > > it looks like, yes.
"Modify the planner to better estimate caching effects"? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
