Tom Lane wrote:
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
(The default statistics target is 10, which is widely considered too
low --- you might find 100 more suitable.)
Does this mean that we should look into raising the default a bit?
Probably ... the question is to what.
The default of 10 was chosen in our usual spirit of conservatism ---
and IIRC it was replacing code that tracked only *one* most common
value, so it was already a factor of 10 better (and more expensive)
than what was there before. But subsequent history suggests it's
too small. I'm not sure I want to vote for another 10x increase by
default, though.
Outside of longer analyze times, and slightly more space taken up by the
statistics, what is the downside? I mean in reality... what is setting
to 100 going to do to effect actual production usage of even a modest
machine?
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
--
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
