From: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: ANALYZE sampling is too good |
Date: | 2013-12-12 20:11:40 |
Message-ID: | CAMkU=1z1eY7YtbqzNQWNu-sejniQWiq7aorqOwuUyj5E4Rvhdw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu> wrote:
> At multiple conferences I've heard about people trying all sorts of
> gymnastics to avoid ANALYZE which they expect to take too long and
> consume too much I/O. This is especially a big complain after upgrades
> when their new database performs poorly until the new statistics are
> in and they did pg_upgrade to avoid an extended downtime and complain
> about ANALYZE taking hours.
>
Out of curiosity, are they using the 3 stage script
"analyze_new_cluster.sh"? If so, is the complaint that even the first
rounds are too slow, or that the database remains unusable until the last
round is complete?
Cheers,
Jeff
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2013-12-12 21:24:34 | Re: pgsql: Fix a couple of bugs in MultiXactId freezing |
Previous Message | Claudio Freire | 2013-12-12 19:20:50 | Re: ANALYZE sampling is too good |