On 13-03-2012 21:34, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> It might be a solution for cases where we don't modify it. I frankly am
> worried that if we copy over statistics even in ASCII that don't match
> what the server expects, it might lead to a crash, which has me back to
> wanting to speed up vacuumdb.
That was discussed in another thread some time ago . Adopting a hack
solution is not the way to go. It could lead to bad consequences in a near future.
For 9.2, we could advise users to divide the ANALYZE step into
ANALYZE-per-table steps and run them all in parallel. This ANALYZE-per-table
ranking could be accomplished using a simple approach like '... row_number()
OVER (ORDER BY pg_relation_size(oid) ... WHERE row_number % n = x' (tip stolen
from Simon's book).
Euler Taveira de Oliveira - Timbira http://www.timbira.com.br/
PostgreSQL: Consultoria, Desenvolvimento, Suporte 24x7 e Treinamento
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Jeff Davis||Date: 2012-03-14 04:23:03|
|Subject: Re: initdb and fsync|
|Previous:||From: Noah Misch||Date: 2012-03-14 03:42:26|
|Subject: Re: foreign key locks, 2nd attempt|