"Nathan Boley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > ... There are two potential problems that I see with this approach:
> 1) It assumes the = is equivalent to <= and >= . This is certainly > true for real numbers, but is it true for every equality relation that > eqsel predicts for? The cases that compute_scalar_stats is used in have that property, since the < and = operators are taken from the same btree opclass. > Do people think that the improved estimates would be worth the > additional overhead? Your argument seems to consider only columns having a normal distribution. How badly does it fall apart for non-normal distributions? (For instance, Zipfian distributions seem to be pretty common in database work, from what I've seen.) regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers