Re: Potential autovacuum optimization: new tables

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Potential autovacuum optimization: new tables
Date: 2012-10-13 01:25:33
Message-ID: 20121013012533.GD29165@tamriel.snowman.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

* Josh Berkus (josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com) wrote:
> Because Snowman asked me for an example:

Thanks. :)

> That's a 25X difference in execution time. This is not the first time
> I've seen this issue.

If we can figure out an 'easy' solution to this, I'd definitely vote for
it being back-patched. Having a table simply never get analyze'd
strikes me as a very bad thing.

Thanks again,

Stephen

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2012-10-13 01:49:48 Re: Potential autovacuum optimization: new tables
Previous Message Tom Lane 2012-10-13 01:19:29 Re: Potential autovacuum optimization: new tables