Marco Colli <collimarco91@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Let's say that you have a simple query like the following on a large table > (for a multi-tenant application): > SELECT "subscribers".* FROM "subscribers" WHERE "subscribers"."project_id" > = 123 AND (tags @> ARRAY['de']::varchar[]); > If you run EXPLAIN ANALYZE you can see that stats are completely wrong. > For example I get an expected count of 3,500 rows whereas the actual > result is 20 rows. This also results in bad query plans... > In a previous discussion someone said that this wrong estimate is because > @> uses a fixed selectivity of 0.001, **regardless of actual data**!! > Is that true? Hasn't been true since 9.2. You might get some insight from looking into the most_common_elems, most_common_elem_freqs, and elem_count_histogram fields of the pg_stats view. It seems likely to me that increasing the statistics target for this array column would help. IIRC, estimates for values that don't show up in most_common_elems are going to depend on the lowest frequency that *does* show up there ... so if you want better resolution for non-common values, you need more entries. regards, tom lane
