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

Re: [HACKERS] Autovacuum loose ends

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net>,pgsql-patches(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Autovacuum loose ends
Date: 2005-07-24 20:06:51
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
On Sun, Jul 24, 2005 at 02:33:38PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> writes:
> > - pg_statistic is completely ignored.
> ... pg_statistic still needs vacuuming, surely.  It's only ANALYZE
> that you can/should skip for it.

Sorry, yes, it's ignored only for analyze.

> > - The postmaster's main loop sleeps Min(60, autovacuum_naptime), in
> >   order to be able to pick naptimes smaller than 60 seconds.  In order
> >   not to make the loop a busy-wait, I forced a minimum of 1 to that GUC
> >   var.
> Hmm, I wonder whether the minimum shouldn't be 10.  Or even 60.

It's ok with me.  What do other people think?

> >   We have to consider what
> >   happens at stat reset -- AFAICS there's no problem, because as soon as
> >   the table sees some activity, it will be picked up by pgstat.
> >   However, it would be bad if stats are reset right after some heavy
> >   activity on a table.  Maybe the only thing we need is documentation.
> What's the use-case for having the stat reset feature at all?

I don't know.  Maybe the people who added it can tell?

> > - There are stat messages emitted for a database-wide vacuum, just like
> >   any other.  This means that all tables in the database would end up in
> >   pgstat; and also all databases, including those with datallowconn = false.
> >   This may not be good.  I'm not sure what exactly to do about it.  Do
> >   we want to disallow such stats?  Disable message sending (or
> >   collecting) in some circumstances?
> Needs thought...


Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]>)
"I call it GNU/Linux. Except the GNU/ is silent." (Ben Reiter)

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-07-24 20:24:57
Subject: Re: For review: Server instrumentation patch
Previous:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2005-07-24 19:55:09
Subject: Re: A Guide to Constraint Exclusion (Partitioning)

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-07-24 22:00:15
Subject: Proposed patch to remove .so pattern rules from platform Makefiles
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-07-24 19:35:29
Subject: Re: Regression - GNUmakefile - pg_usleep

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