Re: reducing statistics write overhead

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Martin Pihlak <martin(dot)pihlak(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: reducing statistics write overhead
Date: 2009-01-23 04:58:41
Message-ID: 26106.1232686721@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com> writes:
> Alvaro Herrera escreveu:
>> Well, the problem is precisely how to size the list. I don't like the
>> idea of keeping an arbitrary number in memory; it adds another
>> mostly-useless tunable that we'll need to answer questions about for all
>> eternity.

Is it so hard? In particular, rather than making it a tunable, what say
we freeze the list size at exactly two, ie each AV worker advertises its
current and most recent target table in shared memory. Other workers
avoid re-vacuuming those. Then the most work you can "waste" by extra
vacuuming is less than the maximum allowed stats file age. I'd have no
problem whatsoever in letting that run into multiple seconds, as long
as it doesn't get into minutes or hours.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message KaiGai Kohei 2009-01-23 05:30:35 SE-PostgreSQL Updated Revision (r1460)
Previous Message Euler Taveira de Oliveira 2009-01-23 04:28:03 Re: reducing statistics write overhead