Etsuro Fujita fujita.ets...@lab.ntt.co.jp writes:
Agreed. However, I am concerned about the next comment in the current code:
/*
* Our generic assumption is that the index pages will be read
* sequentially, so they cost seq_page_cost each, not random_page_cost.
* ...
I think this
From: Tom Lane [mailto:t...@sss.pgh.pa.us]
Etsuro Fujita fujita.ets...@lab.ntt.co.jp writes:
Agreed. However, I am concerned about the next comment in the current code:
/*
* Our generic assumption is that the index pages will be read
* sequentially, so they cost seq_page_cost each,
Etsuro Fujita fujita.ets...@lab.ntt.co.jp writes:
ISTM it would be better to update the text about index cost estimation in
indexam.sgml. Please find attached a patch.
I'm not too thrilled with the proposed patch. In the first place, I
don't think it's necessary to address costing of index
From: Tom Lane [mailto:t...@sss.pgh.pa.us]
Etsuro Fujita fujita.ets...@lab.ntt.co.jp writes:
ISTM it would be better to update the text about index cost estimation in
indexam.sgml. Please find attached a patch.
I'm not too thrilled with the proposed patch. In the first place, I
don't
ISTM it would be better to update the text about index cost estimation in
indexam.sgml. Please find attached a patch.
Thanks,
Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita
indexam.sgml.patch
Description: Binary data
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your
