[HACKERS] relation cache statistics (was: -HEAD planner issue wrt hash_joins on dbt3 ?)

2006-09-17 Thread Jim C. Nasby
On Sun, Sep 17, 2006 at 04:18:36PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: * table and index. (Ideally other_pages should include all the other * tables and indexes used by the query too; but we don't have a good way * to get that number here.) A first-order approximation to this would be to add up the

Re: [HACKERS] relation cache statistics (was: -HEAD planner issue wrt hash_joins on dbt3 ?)

2006-09-17 Thread Tom Lane
Jim C. Nasby [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I think it'd be better to attack this problem from the other side; namely looking at what's actually cached. You can kiss goodbye to plan stability if you go that route... and in any case I doubt the assumption that what's in shared buffers is

Re: [HACKERS] relation cache statistics (was: -HEAD planner issue wrt hash_joins on dbt3 ?)

2006-09-17 Thread Jim C. Nasby
On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 12:20:10AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: Jim C. Nasby [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I think it'd be better to attack this problem from the other side; namely looking at what's actually cached. You can kiss goodbye to plan stability if you go that route... and in any case I