> From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us]
> "Etsuro Fujita" <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> writes:
> > ISTM it would be better to update the text about index cost estimation in
> > indexam.sgml. Please find attached a patch.
>
> I'm not too thrilled with the proposed patch. In the first place, I
> don't think it's necessary to address costing of index order-by
> expressions in an introductory explanation.
Agreed.
> In the second, this change
> makes the code less clear, not more so, because it introduces a variable
> indexQuals without showing where you would get that value from.
Agreed. However, I am concerned about the next comment in the current code:
/** Our generic assumption is that the index pages will be read* sequentially, so they cost seq_page_cost each, not
random_page_cost.*...
I think this assumption is completely wrong, which has given me a motivation to
propose a patch, though I am missing something.
Thanks,
Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita