Re: Why not represent "never vacuumed" accurately wrt pg_class.relpages?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Robert Haas
Тема Re: Why not represent "never vacuumed" accurately wrt pg_class.relpages?
Дата
Msg-id CA+Tgmob+wB_89foHmjg5d4AUb3W=isq+MUGXaL5RsSpJQuo87g@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Why not represent "never vacuumed" accurately wrt pg_class.relpages?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: Why not represent "never vacuumed" accurately wrtpg_class.relpages?  (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 11:47 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> > I don't quite get why we don't instead just represent "never vacuumed"
> > by storing a more meaningful value in relpages?
>
> Mostly, not wanting to break clients that look at these fields.
> If catalog compatibility weren't a concern, I'd seriously consider
> replacing both of them with a float "average tuples per page" ratio.

I think we should do exactly that thing.

And I also agree that assuming 10 pages when pg_class says 0 and 1
page when pg_class says 1 is not particularly bright.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: David Steele
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Remove Deprecated Exclusive Backup Mode
Следующее
От: David Steele
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Add timeline to partial WAL segments