On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 4:29 PM Joe Conway wrote:
> meh -- the people who expect this to be impossibly fast don't typically
> need or expect it to be exactly correct, and there is no way to make it
> "exactly correct" in someone's snapshot without doing all the work.
I think it could actually be
On 10/21/21 4:29 PM, Joe Conway wrote:
> On 10/21/21 4:23 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 4:19 PM Joe Conway wrote:
>>> That is a grossly overstated position. When I have looked, it is often
>>> not that terribly far off. And for many use cases that I have heard of
>>> at least
On 10/21/21 4:23 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 4:19 PM Joe Conway wrote:
That is a grossly overstated position. When I have looked, it is often
not that terribly far off. And for many use cases that I have heard of
at least, quite adequate.
I don't think it's grossly overstat
On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 4:19 PM Joe Conway wrote:
> That is a grossly overstated position. When I have looked, it is often
> not that terribly far off. And for many use cases that I have heard of
> at least, quite adequate.
I don't think it's grossly overstated. If you need an approximation it
ma
On 10/21/21 4:06 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 9:09 AM Joe Conway wrote:
I think you are exactly correct. People seem to understand that with a
predicate it is harder, but they expect
select count(*) from foo;
to be nearly instantaneous, and they don't really need it to be
On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 9:09 AM Joe Conway wrote:
> I think you are exactly correct. People seem to understand that with a
> predicate it is harder, but they expect
>
> select count(*) from foo;
>
> to be nearly instantaneous, and they don't really need it to be exact.
> The stock answer for tha
On 10/20/21 2:33 PM, John Naylor wrote:
On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 2:23 PM Tomas Vondra
mailto:tomas.von...@enterprisedb.com>>
wrote:
>
> Couldn't we simply inspect the visibility map, use the index data only
> for fully visible/summarized ranges, and inspect the heap for the
> remaining pag
On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 2:41 PM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
> BTW you mentioned using BRIN indexes for min/max - I've been thinking
> about using BRIN indexes for ordering/sorting, which seems related. And
> I think it's actually doable, so I wonder why you concluded using BRIN
> indexes for min/max is n
On 10/20/21 20:33, John Naylor wrote:
On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 2:23 PM Tomas Vondra
mailto:tomas.von...@enterprisedb.com>>
wrote:
>
> Couldn't we simply inspect the visibility map, use the index data only
> for fully visible/summarized ranges, and inspect the heap for the
> remaining pa
On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 2:23 PM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
>
> Couldn't we simply inspect the visibility map, use the index data only
> for fully visible/summarized ranges, and inspect the heap for the
> remaining pages? That'd still be a huge improvement for tables with most
> only a few pages modified
On 10/20/21 19:57, Tom Lane wrote:
John Naylor writes:
Perennially our users have complaints about slow count(*) when coming from
some other systems. Index-only scans help, but I think we can do better. I
recently wondered if a BRIN index could be used to answer min/max aggregate
queries over t
Hi,
On October 20, 2021 10:57:50 AM PDT, Tom Lane wrote:
>John Naylor writes:
>> Perennially our users have complaints about slow count(*) when coming from
>> some other systems. Index-only scans help, but I think we can do better. I
>> recently wondered if a BRIN index could be used to answer
John Naylor writes:
> Perennially our users have complaints about slow count(*) when coming from
> some other systems. Index-only scans help, but I think we can do better. I
> recently wondered if a BRIN index could be used to answer min/max aggregate
> queries over the whole table, and it turns o
Hi,
Perennially our users have complaints about slow count(*) when coming from
some other systems. Index-only scans help, but I think we can do better. I
recently wondered if a BRIN index could be used to answer min/max aggregate
queries over the whole table, and it turns out it doesn't. However,
14 matches
Mail list logo
