Folks,
Currently, JSONB fields don't have statistics, and estimate a flat 1%
selectivity. This can result in poor query plans, and I'm wondering if
anyone has a suggested workaround for this short of hacking a new
selectivity function. For example, take the common case of using JSONB
to hold a l
Hi,
On 26.1.2015 17:32, Christian Roche wrote:
> select *
>
> from mixpanel_events_201409 mp
>
> inner join mixpanel_event_list ev on ( ev.id = mp.event_id )
>
> where ev.id in (3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 373, 375, 376, 318);
>
>
>
> Hash Join (cost=20.73..2892183.32 rows=487288 width=
"Christian Roche" writes:
> Now when I select a subset of the possible event IDs in the big table, PG
> uses the appropriate index:
> select *
> from mixpanel_events_201409
> where event_id in (3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 373, 375, 376, 318);
> Bitmap Heap Scan on mixpanel_events_201409 (c
On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 9:14 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> AlexK987 writes:
> > The documentation states that "The extent of analysis can be controlled
> by
> > adjusting the default_statistics_target configuration variable". It looks
> > like I can tell Postgres to create more histograms with more bins
Hi guys,
Can I take a jab at the celebrated “why is Postgres not using my index” riddle?
I’m using PostgreSQL 9.3.3 on an Amazon RDS “db.r3.xlarge” 64-bit instance. I
have two tables, one with about 30M rows and two indexes (in fact a monthly
partition):
CREATE TABLE staging.mixpanel_events_20