Re: Should the docs have a warning about pg_stat_reset()?

On 27/03/2019 22:28, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 2019-03-26 16:28, Euler Taveira wrote:
>> I don't remember why we didn't consider table without stats to be
>> ANALYZEd. Isn't it the case to fix autovacuum? Analyze
>> autovacuum_count + vacuum_count = 0?
> 
> When the autovacuum system was introduced, we didn't have those columns.
>  But now it seems to make sense that a table with autoanalyze_count +
> analyze_count = 0 should be a candidate for autovacuum even if the write
> statistics are zero.  Obviously, this would have the effect that a
> pg_stat_reset() causes an immediate autovacuum for all tables, so maybe
> it's not quite that simple.

Not just pg_stat_reset() but also on promotion.
-- 
Vik Fearing                                          +33 6 46 75 15 36
http://2ndQuadrant.fr     PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support