Re: analyze after a database restore?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: mlw <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: analyze after a database restore?
Date: 2003-02-27 20:12:36
Message-ID: 27615.1046376756@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

mlw <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com> writes:
> From an "ease of use" perspective, it would be one less step.

There is something to be said for that. As Rod notes, this has been
considered and rejected before --- but I think that was back when
ANALYZE (a) could only be done as part of VACUUM, and (b) insisted on
scanning the whole table. The current implementation is vastly
lighter-weight than what we were looking at back then. Perhaps it's
time to reconsider.

Although I suggested doing a single unconditional ANALYZE at the end
of the script, second thought leads me to think the per-table ANALYZE
(probably issued right after the table's data-load step) might be
better. That way you'd not have any side-effects on already-existing
tables in the database you are loading to. OTOH, that way would leave
the system catalogs un-analyzed, which might be bad.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stephen Marshall 2003-02-27 22:10:01 Re: Free-space-map management thoughts
Previous Message Rod Taylor 2003-02-27 20:07:50 Re: Can pessimistic locking be emulated?