Re: [HACKERS] ANALYZE getting dead tuple count hopelessly wrong

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "Stuart Brooks" <stuartb(at)cat(dot)co(dot)za>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] ANALYZE getting dead tuple count hopelessly wrong
Date: 2008-04-03 17:09:58
Message-ID: 4236.1207242598@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

"Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Thanks. I had another concern about VACUUM not reporting DEAD line
> pointers (please see up thread). Any comments on that ?

If you want to work on that, go ahead, but I wanted it separate because
I didn't think it merited back-patching. It's strictly cosmetic in
terms of being about what VACUUM VERBOSE prints, no?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Steve Atkins 2008-04-03 17:12:03 Re: Secure "where in(a,b,c)" clause.
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2008-04-03 17:08:43 Re: PG 8.3.x doesn't get build

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2008-04-03 17:16:39 Re: [GENERAL] SHA1 on postgres 8.3
Previous Message Svenne Krap 2008-04-03 17:07:56 Re: [GENERAL] SHA1 on postgres 8.3