Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: pg_upgrade and statistics

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>,"Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Daniel Farina" <daniel(at)heroku(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade and statistics
Date: 2012-03-13 14:28:58
Message-ID: 4F5F135A02000025000461F5@gw.wicourts.gov (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
 
> I just received a sobering blog comment stating that pg_upgrade
> took 5 minutes on a 0.5TB database, but analyze took over an hour:
 
Yeah, we have had similar experiences.  Even if this can't be done
for every release or for every data type, bringing over statistics
from the old release as a starting point would really help minimize
downtime on large databases.
 
Of course, release docs should indicate which statistics *won't* be
coming across, and should probably recommend a database ANALYZE or
VACUUM ANALYZE be done when possible.
 
-Kevin

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2012-03-13 14:34:16
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade and statistics
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2012-03-13 14:28:32
Subject: Re: Explicitly specifying use of IN/OUT variable in PL/pgSQL functions

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group