On Tue, 13 Jan 2009, Tom Lane wrote:
Jeff Frost writes:
On Tue, 13 Jan 2009, Tom Lane wrote:
It would change the size of the sample for the table, which might
improve the accuracy of the stats. IIRC you'd still get the same number
of histogram entries and most-common-values for the other col
Jeff Frost writes:
> On Tue, 13 Jan 2009, Tom Lane wrote:
>> It would change the size of the sample for the table, which might
>> improve the accuracy of the stats. IIRC you'd still get the same number
>> of histogram entries and most-common-values for the other columns, but
>> they might be more
On Tue, 13 Jan 2009, Tom Lane wrote:
Jeff Frost writes:
So, my question is, should changing the stats target on the shape column
affect the stats for the content_id and content_type columns?
It would change the size of the sample for the table, which might
improve the accuracy of the stats.
Jeff Frost writes:
> So, my question is, should changing the stats target on the shape column
> affect the stats for the content_id and content_type columns?
It would change the size of the sample for the table, which might
improve the accuracy of the stats. IIRC you'd still get the same number
So, I had a query that uses a postgis geometry index and the planner was
underestimating the number of rows it would return. Because of this,
the planner was choosing the geometry index over a compound index on the
other columns in the WHERE clause. So, I thought, let me increase the
stats target
