Re: analyze-in-stages post upgrade questions

On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 12:16 AM Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2025-08-19 at 23:40 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
> > > > --- a/doc/src/sgml/ref/vacuumdb.sgml
> > > > +++ b/doc/src/sgml/ref/vacuumdb.sgml
> > > > @@ -397,6 +397,15 @@ PostgreSQL documentation
> > > >           Multiple tables can be vacuumed by writing multiple
> > > >           <option>-t</option> switches.
> > > >          </para>
> > > > +       <para>
> > > > +        If no tables are specified with the <option>--table</option> option,
> > > > +        <application>vacuumdb</application> will clean all regular tables
> > > > +        and materialized views in the connected database.
> > > > +        If <option>--analyze-only</option> or
> > > > +        <option>--analyze-in-stages</option> is also specified,
> > > > +        it will analyze all regular tables, partitioned tables,
> > > > +        and materialized views (but not foreign tables).
> > > > +       </para>
> > >
> > > I suggest replacing "clean" with "process", since VACUUM does so much more than
> > > clean up dead tuples.
> >
> > I see your point. However, since the vacuumdb docs already use "clean"
> > in several places, I think it's better to keep using "clean" here
> > for consistency. Thought?
>
> Works for me; I didn't consider that.
>
> > > Concerning backpatching, I voted against, but I suggest that this be backpatched
> > > to v18.  I don't feel very strongly about it though.
> >
> > As for back-patching, I failed to find a strong reason to apply this change
> > to v18 over the many other patches that could not be committed before
> > the feature freeze... Of course if there's broad support for back-patching,
> > we can certainly revisit it. But for now I'm thinking to commit the patch
> > to master.
>
> I don't have a strong reason either - my reasoning was that the change is small
> and unlikely to introduce a bug, and that it would be nice to get more accurate
> statistics on partitioned tables after "pg_upgrade" a year earlier.
>
> But I won't object if the patch is only in v19.

OK, so for now I've pushed the patch to master. Thanks!

Regards,

--
Fujii Masao