On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 10:37:24AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> with a plain indexscan. What you need to do is compare the two
> functions and figure out what part of the cost models are out of line
> with reality. I tend to agree with the upthread comment that the
> nonlinear interpolation between m
Andrew Sagulin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Does PostgreSQL's development team plan to revise the index scan
> cost algorithm or issues like mine is too rare for taking into account?
The algorithm is certainly open for discussion, but we're not changing
it on the basis of just a single report ...
On Tue, 2006-06-27 at 16:14 +0400, Andrew Sagulin wrote:
> Result showed up that there were no page seq scan at all - true random access
> only.
> The simple model which can explain the situation: the sequence of numbers 2,
> 1,
> 4, 3, 6, 5, ..., 100, 99 has correlation about 0,9994. Let's imagi
