Re: [HACKERS] ANALYZE getting dead tuple count hopelessly wrong

On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 10:39 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> "Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>
> > Thanks. I had another concern about VACUUM not reporting DEAD line
> > pointers (please see up thread). Any comments on that ?
>
> If you want to work on that, go ahead

Ok. I would do that.

> but I wanted it separate because
> I didn't think it merited back-patching. It's strictly cosmetic in
> terms of being about what VACUUM VERBOSE prints, no?
>

Umm.. Whatever we decide on the fix, I think we should backpatch it to
8.3 because I am worried that someone way get completely confused with
the current vacuum report, especially if the autovac is triggered just
because of
heap full of DEAD line pointers. The num of dead rows reported may
awfully be low in that case.

Thanks,
Pavan

--
Pavan Deolasee
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com