Re: auto-vacuum & Negative "anl" Values

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Dylan Hansen
Тема Re: auto-vacuum & Negative "anl" Values
Дата
Msg-id 961A41EC-0E80-4111-862B-8DD8809C18FF@pixpo.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: auto-vacuum & Negative "anl" Values  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>)
Список pgsql-general
Hi Tom, Alvaro,

Thanks for your work on this.  Please keep me posted as to which version in CVS this fix will be applied to and I will do my best to test it.

Thanks again!

--

Dylan Hansen

Enterprise Systems Developer

On 27-Jun-06, at 5:42 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:

Tom Lane wrote:
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes:
+ /* last_anl_tuples must never exceed n_live_tuples */

If we actually believe the above statement, it seems like your patch
to pgstat_recv_tabstat() opens a new issue: with that patch, it is
possible for pgstat_recv_tabstat() to decrease n_live_tuples, and
therefore a clamp needs to be applied in pgstat_recv_tabstat() too.
No?

Hmm, yeah.

The reason I didn't patch it myself is that I'm not quite clear on what
*should* be happening here.  What effect should a large delete have on
the ANALYZE threshold, exactly?  You could argue that a deletion
potentially changes the statistics (by omission), and therefore inserts,
updates, and deletes should equally count +1 towards the analyze
threshold.  I don't think we are implementing that though.  If we want
to do it that way, I suspect last_anl_tuples as currently defined is not
the right comparison point.

Maybe what we should do is revert the pgstat_recv_tabstat() part of the
patch in 8.1, and consider redefining last_anl_tuples in HEAD.  Caffeine
is not high enough yet to propose anything sensible, but I'll think
about it a bit later.

-- 
Alvaro Herrera                                http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support



В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Scott Marlowe
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: RAID + PostgreSQL?
Следующее
От: Bruno Wolff III
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: FKs Lock Contention