Re: dead tuple difference between pgstattuple and pg_stat_user_tables
От | Adrian Klaver |
---|---|
Тема | Re: dead tuple difference between pgstattuple and pg_stat_user_tables |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 5f0601fd-7ab9-4b40-9356-43c463223bed@aklaver.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: dead tuple difference between pgstattuple and pg_stat_user_tables (Matthew Tice <mjtice@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: dead tuple difference between pgstattuple and pg_stat_user_tables
|
Список | pgsql-general |
On 8/23/24 09:33, Matthew Tice wrote: > > > On Fri, Aug 23, 2024 at 10:26 AM Adrian Klaver > <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com <mailto:adrian.klaver@aklaver.com>> wrote: > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/pgstattuple.html > <https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/pgstattuple.html> > > pgstattuple_approx(regclass) returns record > > pgstattuple_approx is a faster alternative to pgstattuple that > returns approximate results. > > Not sure how you get exact count out of that? > > > Maybe the wording is a little confusing to me. Under the section > for pgstattuple_approx: > "pgstattuple_approx tries to avoid the full-table scan and returns exact > dead tuple statistics along with an approximation of the number and size > of live tuples and free space." Yeah, see what you mean. The part that bears more investigating for this case is: "It does this by skipping pages that have only visible tuples according to the visibility map (if a page has the corresponding VM bit set, then it is assumed to contain no dead tuples). Wondering if PostgreSQl-compatible covers this? -- Adrian Klaver adrian.klaver@aklaver.com
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: