From: | The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Zeugswetter Andreas IZ5 <Andreas(dot)Zeugswetter(at)telecom(dot)at> |
Cc: | "'hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org'" <hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: AW: [HACKERS] Really slow query on 6.4.2 |
Date: | 1999-03-25 15:58:01 |
Message-ID: | Pine.BSF.4.05.9903251154390.6652-100000@thelab.hub.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 25 Mar 1999, Zeugswetter Andreas IZ5 wrote:
>
> > Unfortunately, if you haven't done a vacuum, the system effectively
> > assumes that all your tables are tiny. I think this is a brain-dead
> > default, but haven't had much luck convincing anyone else that the
> > default should be changed.
> >
> I totally agree with Tom Lane here. Let me try to give some arguments.
Maybe I've missed something here, but I don't think anyone disagree's that
our stats aren't the best, but I also don't think anyone has step'd up and
provided an alternative...have they?
Personally, I'd like to see some method where stats can, to a certain
extent, be updated automagically, when changes are made to the table. The
generated stats wouldn't *replace* vacuum, just reduce the overall need
for them.
I'm not sure what is all contained in the stats, but the easiest one, I
think, to have done automagically is table sizes...add a tuple, update the
table of number of rows automatically. If that numbers gets "off", at
least it will be more reasonable then not doing anything...no?
Marc G. Fournier ICQ#7615664 IRC Nick: Scrappy
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
primary: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org secondary: scrappy(at){freebsd|postgresql}.org
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 1999-03-25 16:29:12 | Re: [HACKERS] Really slow query on 6.4.2 |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 1999-03-25 15:23:16 | Re: [HACKERS] Really slow query on 6.4.2 |