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

Re: pg_upgrade and statistics

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: "Daniel Farina" <daniel(at)heroku(dot)com>,"Greg Stark" <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, "pgsql-hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade and statistics
Date: 2012-03-15 15:20:02
Message-ID: 4F61C25302000025000462F4@gw.wicourts.gov (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
 
> I think we have two choices --- either migrate the statistics, or
> adopt my approach to generating incremental statistics quickly.
> Does anyone see any other options?
 
Would it make any sense to modify the incremental approach to do a
first pass of any tables with target overrides, using the default
GUC setting, and then proceed through the passes you describe for
all tables *except* those?  I'm thinking that any overrides were
probably set because the columns are particularly important in terms
of accurate statistics, and that running with different GUC settings
will just be a waste of time for those tables -- if they have a high
setting for any column, they will sample more blocks for every run,
right?
 
-Kevin

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2012-03-15 15:46:04
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade and statistics
Previous:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2012-03-15 15:15:42
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade and statistics

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