Re: Optional skipping of unchanged relations during ANALYZE?
| От | Sami Imseih |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Optional skipping of unchanged relations during ANALYZE? |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAA5RZ0t=fGScwGL9=_HJzXf3808-U4zqne+qAob6R2PYcj-9YA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Optional skipping of unchanged relations during ANALYZE? (Sami Imseih <samimseih@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Optional skipping of unchanged relations during ANALYZE?
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
>> I agree with this, but I think it's more than just tables that have >> not been analyzed. >> What if a new column is added after the last (auto)analyze. Would we not want to >> trigger an analyze in that case? >> > Well, I don't know that we are "triggering" anything, but this is > definitely a case where we have "missing stats". > When MISSING_STATS is passed, we attempt to analyze only tables that > have missing stats, essentially implementing a version of > --missing-stats-only I also want to do add that the benefit of implementing a --missing-stats fo ANALYZE is that the timestamps in pg_stat_all_tables are cleared on crash recovery, but pg_statistic is obviously persistent. So it is better to look directly there as --missing-stats-only does for vacuumdb. unfortunately, this is not the case for n_mod_since_analyze, because that does not survive. There is discussion about improving this situation however [0]. [0] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20240607033806.6gwgolihss72cj6r@awork3.anarazel.de -- Sami Imseih Amazon Web Services (AWS)
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: