Re: COUNT(*) and index-only scans

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Josh Berkus
Тема Re: COUNT(*) and index-only scans
Дата
Msg-id 4E94969B.7030406@agliodbs.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: COUNT(*) and index-only scans  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: COUNT(*) and index-only scans
Список pgsql-hackers
> The trouble is that if we VACUUM and then ANALYZE, we'll often get
> back a value very close to 100%, but then the real value may diminish
> quite a bit before the next auto-analyze fires.  I think if we can
> figure out what to do about that problem we'll be well on our way...

It's not so much an issue of when the last auto-analyze was as an issue
of the number of rows in write transactions against that table in the
last X minutes.  This is where it really hurts us that
pg_stat_user_tables is not time-based.

-- 
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Simon Riggs
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Overhead cost of Serializable Snapshot Isolation
Следующее
От: Bruce Momjian
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Overhead cost of Serializable Snapshot Isolation