On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 7:03 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> >> Partially. There are stats now but autovacuum is not bright about
> >> when to update them.
> > Is that something you're planning to fix for 9.0? If not, we at least
> > need to document what we intend for people to do about it.
> I want to look at it, but I'm not sure whether the fix will be small
> enough that we want to put it in during beta.
> I am pretty sure many people will appreciate it, even if it isn't going to
Is that stat collection across child tables any useful by it self ?
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Francisco Reyes||Date: 2010-03-02 20:42:37|
|Subject: 10K vs 15k rpm for analytics|
|Previous:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2010-03-02 16:23:22|
|Subject: Re: GiST index performance|
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2010-03-02 16:29:58|
|Subject: Re: USE_LIBXSLT in MSVC builds |
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2010-03-02 16:23:18|
|Subject: Re: No hash join across partitioned tables? |