Re: new vacuum is slower for small tables

Tom Lane wrote:
> "Pavel Stehule" <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > It's strange, when I repeat tests, I get usually times about 10 ms,
> > but cca cca every 5 test it is about 2ms
>
> Hmm. The theory I'd developed for what I see here is that the "slow"
> timings correspond to when the pgstat code decides it needs a new stats
> file (and so it has to signal the stats collector and wait for the file
> to show up). The "fast" timings occur if the existing stats file is
> considered fresh enough to re-use. Hence, it's "fast" if you re-execute
> the VACUUM within half a second of the previous one, else slow. I can't
> tell if that's the same thing you see or not.
>
> Now that we have the flexibility to allow different levels of stats
> stale-ness for different callers, I wonder whether it wouldn't be okay
> to let pgstat_vacuum_stat work with quite stale files, eg up to a minute
> or so.

Are we doing anything on this?

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +