| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | yuzuko <yuzukohosoya(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <masahiko(dot)sawada(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Autovacuum on partitioned table (autoanalyze) |
| Date: | 2021-04-08 05:20:14 |
| Message-ID: | 20210408052014.GA28806@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2021-Apr-07, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> OK, I bit the bullet and re-did the logic in the way I had proposed
> earlier in the thread: do the propagation on the collector's side, by
> sending only the list of ancestors: the collector can read the tuple
> change count by itself, to add it to each ancestor. This seems less
> wasteful. Attached is v16 which does it that way and seems to work
> nicely under my testing.
Pushed with this approach. Thanks for persisting with this.
--
Álvaro Herrera Valdivia, Chile
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2021-04-08 05:20:39 | pgsql: autovacuum: handle analyze for partitioned tables |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2021-04-08 05:16:02 | Re: SQL-standard function body |