"Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Gregory Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> I was planning to use the first and last histogram values for the frame of
>> reference. It could still produce some weird graphs but those cases are
>> precisely the c
Gregory Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> You're presuming there exists a linear scalar space to reference the
>> results to.
> I was planning to use the first and last histogram values for the frame of
> reference. It could still produce some weird grap
"Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Gregory Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> How so? The entries in the histogram are equidistant by definition.
>
>> Huh? They have equal number of values between them, they're not equidistant
>> in
>> the scala
Gregory Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> How so? The entries in the histogram are equidistant by definition.
> Huh? They have equal number of values between them, they're not equidistant in
> the scalar space. So the area of each bar should be the same
"Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Gregory Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> When complaining I hadn't read the pghackers thread in which you
>>> suggested this, and now that I'm caught up on email I remain
>>> unconvinced. What do you need conv
Gregory Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> When complaining I hadn't read the pghackers thread in which you
>> suggested this, and now that I'm caught up on email I remain
>> unconvinced. What do you need convert_to_scalar for in order to display
>> the p
"Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> When complaining I hadn't read the pghackers thread in which you
> suggested this, and now that I'm caught up on email I remain
> unconvinced. What do you need convert_to_scalar for in order to display
> the pg_statistic histogram? You've already got the
Gregory Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Gregory Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> Attached is a patch which implements, as discussed briefly on -hackers, a
>.> user-visible function to get at the information that convert_to_scalar uses
>to
>>> gene
"Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Gregory Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Attached is a patch which implements, as discussed briefly on -hackers, a
>> user-visible function to get at the information that convert_to_scalar uses
>> to
>> generate selectivity estimates.
>
> This is an a
Gregory Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Attached is a patch which implements, as discussed briefly on -hackers, a
> user-visible function to get at the information that convert_to_scalar uses to
> generate selectivity estimates.
This is an astonishingly bad idea, as it exposes and thereby sets
10 matches
Mail list logo
