Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Potential autovacuum optimization: new tables

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: David Johnston <polobo(at)yahoo(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>,"pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Potential autovacuum optimization: new tables
Date: 2012-10-13 02:53:10
Message-ID: 20121013025310.GF29165@tamriel.snowman.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
* David Johnston (polobo(at)yahoo(dot)com) wrote:
> Instead of global could you attach an interface function to the table and have the auto-analyzer call that function to basically ask the table whether it needs to be analyzed?  Still need to deal with defaults and provide a decent supply of built-in algorithms but at least the system can be made tunable.  The default algorithm could maybe just handoff to a table size specific handler.  The create table and alter table commands could be used to change the assigned algorithm if desired and new ones could be supplied via extensions.

For my part, while that's certainly an interesting idea, it's far more
complicated than even providing GUCs and the idea is to make PG just "do
it right", not to offer the user more ways to get it wrong...

	Thanks,

		Stephen

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Fabrízio de Royes MelloDate: 2012-10-13 03:56:19
Subject: Re: Adding comments for system table/column names
Previous:From: Michael PaquierDate: 2012-10-13 02:50:44
Subject: Re: Support for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group