Re: Status of 8.3 patches

From: ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Status of 8.3 patches
Date: 2007-08-21 05:16:44
Message-ID: 20070821140342.6D20.ITAGAKI.TAKAHIRO@oss.ntt.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> >> o Error correction for n_dead_tuples

> Also, I'm still quite unhappy that the patch converts the tracking of
> n_dead_tuples into a dead-reckoning system in which incremental changes
> are continually applied without any feedback that'd prevent the value
> from diverging arbitrarily far from reality. Murphy's law says that
> the value *will* diverge, if you don't have any negative feedback
> in the loop to force it to track reality.

There is *no feedback loop* in the patch. It will clear the stats at the
beginning of vacuum, and leave n_dead_tuples collected during the vacuum.
Even if some errors are left after the vacuum, they will be cleared at
the next vacuum. Errors should not be accumulated through repeated vacuums.

> There may be something to be done here, but there's not any evidence
> at hand that CVS HEAD actually suffers from a problem in tracking
> n_dead_tuples, and even if it does I do not think that this particular
> patch is a good fix.

The problem is in the cost-based delayed vacuum. We turned cost-delay on
as default and will encourage to use autovacuum at 8.3. Dead tuple ratio
is not predictable from autovacuum_vacuum_scale_factor in the current
behavior; It might make DBA feel unhappy.

Regards,
---
ITAGAKI Takahiro
NTT Open Source Software Center

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Smith 2007-08-21 07:36:57 Re: 8.3 beta testing suggestions welcome
Previous Message Greg Smith 2007-08-21 04:51:42 Re: Status of 8.3 patches