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

Re: [HACKERS] Autovacuum loose ends

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
Cc: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>,"Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net>,pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Autovacuum loose ends
Date: 2005-07-27 22:05:00
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> writes:
> Ok, so there's a reason for having a manual stat-reset.  However what's
> the rationale for cleaning stats at postmaster start?  In fact I think
> it's actively bad because you lose any data you had before postmaster
> stop/crash.

We probably *should* drop the stats file if any WAL replay activity
occurs, because the stats file could be out of sync with reality
--- this is particularly important in a PITR recovery situation,
where the stats file is likely to be WAY out of sync.  (Maybe only
clobber it in PITR mode?)

I agree that the argument for doing it in a normal restart is pretty

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2005-07-27 22:18:10
Subject: Re: Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-07-27 22:01:21
Subject: Some new list.c primitives

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Rocco AltierDate: 2005-07-27 22:09:20
Subject: AIX - pgport/contrib resolution
Previous:From: Kevin McArthurDate: 2005-07-27 20:43:41
Subject: PLPGSQL OID Bug

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group