Hi,
I'm working on adding support of range types in pgAdmin and I have a
really hard time understanding the subtype parameter of a range type.
How can I find all the types associated with a specific operator class?
I'm pretty sure it's a really dumb question, but I'm completely lost
here.
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 11:39 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
A variant idea would be to replace the exact cost comparison with a
second round of fuzzy cost comparison, but with a much tighter fuzz
factor, maybe 1e-6 instead of 0.01.
The fuzz factor is a better idea, IMHO. I would like
Tom Lane WROTE.
So after committing the latest round of parameterized-plan hacking,
I was dismayed to see the buildfarm breaking out in pink, thanks to
some of the members producing a different plan than expected for one
test query. I eventually managed to reproduce that (on the fourth
On 19 April 2012 23:39, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
The idea that I'm toying with is to try to make the choice a bit less
platform-specific, by removing the exact cost test that add_path uses
as its last-ditch comparison step, essentially this:
/*
While playing around with ANALYZE on foreign tables, I noticed
that the row count estimate for foreign scans is still
initialized to 1000 even if there are statistics for the
foreign table. I think that this should be improved.
The attached patch illustrates my suggestion.
BTW, ist there any
Albe Laurenz laurenz.a...@wien.gv.at writes:
What if you remove the exact cost comparison, but leave the part where
old dominates new based on rows?
Um, that is what the proposed patch does.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 7:50 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On 4/19/12, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
The work around would be for the master to refuse to automatically
restart after a crash, insisting on a fail-over instead (or a manual
forcing of recovery)?
I suppose
Tom Lane wrote:
What if you remove the exact cost comparison, but leave the part
where
old dominates new based on rows?
Um, that is what the proposed patch does.
I was referring to the first two lines that the patch removes.
I guess I don't understand why they should go.
Anyway, I fail to
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
This change would mean that, when two paths have the same pathkeys,
parameterization, and rowcount, and fuzzily the same cost, that we
arbitrarily keep the first-submitted one rather than looking at low
order digits of the costs.
+1 on this approach
Albe Laurenz laurenz.a...@wien.gv.at writes:
While playing around with ANALYZE on foreign tables, I noticed
that the row count estimate for foreign scans is still
initialized to 1000 even if there are statistics for the
foreign table. I think that this should be improved.
The attached patch
Albe Laurenz laurenz.a...@wien.gv.at writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
Um, that is what the proposed patch does.
I was referring to the first two lines that the patch removes.
I guess I don't understand why they should go.
What we'd have left after the proposed removal is
Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net writes:
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
A variant idea would be to replace the exact cost comparison with a
second round of fuzzy cost comparison, but with a much tighter fuzz
factor, maybe 1e-6 instead of 0.01.
Not impressed with this idea- the notion
Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 11:39 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
A variant idea would be to replace the exact cost comparison with a
second round of fuzzy cost comparison, but with a much tighter fuzz
factor, maybe 1e-6 instead of 0.01.
The fuzz
On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 12:20 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 7:50 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On 4/19/12, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
The work around would be for the master to refuse to automatically
restart after a crash,
If I understood correctly the following query should give your answer:
Select opcintype from pg_opclass where opcname = 'operator class name';
---Original Message-
From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Guillaume Lelarge
Sent: Friday,
Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net writes:
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
A variant idea would be to replace the exact cost comparison with a
second round of fuzzy cost comparison, but with a much tighter fuzz
factor, maybe 1e-6 instead of 0.01.
Not impressed with this idea- the notion
16 matches
Mail list logo
