From: | Yugo Nagata <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | "Ryohei Takahashi (Fujitsu)" <r(dot)takahashi_2(at)fujitsu(dot)com> |
Cc: | 'David Rowley' <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Corey Huinker <corey(dot)huinker(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Can we use Statistics Import and Export feature to perforamance testing? |
Date: | 2025-10-23 10:27:53 |
Message-ID: | 20251023192753.165621c1ae24b04b718cebf4@sraoss.co.jp |
Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 12:14:08 +0000
"Ryohei Takahashi (Fujitsu)" <r(dot)takahashi_2(at)fujitsu(dot)com> wrote:
> Thank you for your reply.
> I understand that the access plans are not guaranteed to be the same.
>
> Can we add these notes to the pg_dump page in the PostgreSQL Documentation
> in order to prevent users from asking the same question?
I agree that it would be helpful to add this description, since the wording
“statistics manipulation functions” might give the impression that they can
influence generated plans.
I’ve attached a patch that adds a new paragraph to the warning section of the
documentation on statistics manipulation functions:
Manually restored statistics do not guarantee that the same query plans
will be generated as in the source environment, since factors such as
relation sizes, index OIDs, and configuration parameters may affect
planner behavior.
What do you think?
Regards,
Yugo Nagata
--
Yugo Nagata <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
doc_add_warning_on_stats_manipulation_funcs.patch | text/x-diff | 738 bytes |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | shveta malik | 2025-10-23 10:39:39 | Re: POC: enable logical decoding when wal_level = 'replica' without a server restart |
Previous Message | Bertrand Drouvot | 2025-10-23 10:07:23 | Re: Question about InvalidatePossiblyObsoleteSlot() |