Re: Analyze and vacuum, they are sort of mandatory....

if we had a pg_vacuum table that had the last timestamp of a vacuum/analyze for each table and the stats looked like
the default, why not just print a warning message out to the user?

---------- Original Message -----------
From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: "Mark Woodward" <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Sent: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 11:18:03 -0500
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Analyze and vacuum, they are sort of mandatory....

> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> > Yes, that is what autovacuum does. It detects changes in the database
> > and runs analyze if failing to do so would cause PostgreSQL to behave
> > badly. I don't know why it's not turned on by default.
>
> Conservatism. It may well be on by default in some future release,
> but that's not happening in the first release where the code exists
> at all.
>
> autovacuum isn't a 100% solution to the sort of problems Mark is
> complaining about anyway: on a freshly-loaded table you could get bad
> plans because autovacuum hadn't gotten to it yet.
>
> One thing we could consider doing is boosting up the default no-stats
> assumption about the number of distinct values in a column, to the point
> where the planner wouldn't try a hash aggregate unless it had actual
> stats. However, I'm unsure what negative side-effects that might have.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
------- End of Original Message -------