Re: autovacuum not prioritising for-wraparound tables

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: autovacuum not prioritising for-wraparound tables
Date: 2013-02-01 23:08:21
Message-ID: 25728.1359760101@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I picked values that I knew could be easily grabbed, and we don't
> have an immediate tuples-per-page estimate on pg_class.

Er, what? reltuples/relpages is exactly that estimate --- in fact,
it's only because of historical accident that we don't store a single
float field with that ratio, rather than two fields. Both the creation
and the usage of those numbers work explicitly with the ratio.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeff Janes 2013-02-01 23:09:34 Re: autovacuum not prioritising for-wraparound tables
Previous Message Tom Lane 2013-02-01 23:03:46 Re: json api WIP patch