On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 13:15:32 -0500, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I am coming around to the view that we really do need to calculate
>index-specific correlation numbers,
Correlation is a first step. We might also want distribution
information like number of distinct index tuples and histog
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 23:48:30 -0800, Ron Mayer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Would this also help estimates in the case where values in a table
>are tightly clustered, though not in strictly ascending or descending
>order?
No, I was just expanding the existing notion of correlation from single
column
On L, 2005-03-12 at 14:05 -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Tambet,
>
> > In one of our applications we have a database function, which
> > recalculates COGS (cost of good sold) for certain period. This involves
> > deleting bunch of rows from one table, inserting them again in correct
> > order and upd
