| 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 |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| 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
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2012-03-13 14:34:16 | Re: pg_upgrade and statistics |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-03-13 14:28:32 | Re: Explicitly specifying use of IN/OUT variable in PL/pgSQL functions |