Re: progress report for ANALYZE

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tatsuro Yamada <tatsuro(dot)yamada(dot)tf(at)nttcom(dot)co(dot)jp>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: progress report for ANALYZE
Date: 2019-07-08 18:18:45
Message-ID: 20190708181845.GA14186@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2019-Jul-08, Robert Haas wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 5:29 AM Tatsuro Yamada
> <tatsuro(dot)yamada(dot)tf(at)nttcom(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
> > 17520|13599|postgres|16387|f|16387|scanning table|4425|4425
> > 17520|13599|postgres|16387|f|16387|analyzing sample|0|0
> > 17520|13599|postgres|16387|f|16387||0|0 <-- Is it Okay??
> Why do we zero out the block numbers when we switch phases? The
> CREATE INDEX progress reporting patch does that kind of thing too, and
> it seems like poor behavior to me.

Yeah, I got the impression that that was determined to be the desirable
behavior, so I made it do that, but I'm not really happy about it
either. We're not too late to change the CREATE INDEX behavior, but
let's discuss what is it that we want.

Álvaro Herrera
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tomas Vondra 2019-07-08 18:39:08 Re: [Proposal] Table-level Transparent Data Encryption (TDE) and Key Management Service (KMS)
Previous Message Tomas Vondra 2019-07-08 18:18:14 Re: Multivariate MCV list vs. statistics target