| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kim <kim(at)myemma(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: unusual performance for vac following 8.2 upgrade |
| Date: | 2007-01-11 22:26:55 |
| Message-ID: | 6871.1168554415@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
I wrote:
> (2) Reconsider whether last-vacuum-time should be sent to the collector
> unconditionally.
Actually, now that I look, the collector already contains this logic:
/*
* Don't create either the database or table entry if it doesn't already
* exist. This avoids bloating the stats with entries for stuff that is
* only touched by vacuum and not by live operations.
*/
and ditto for analyze messages. So my idea that the addition of
last-vac-time was causing an increase in the statistics file size
compared to 8.1 seems wrong.
How large is your $PGDATA/global/pgstat.stat file, anyway?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2007-01-11 22:30:36 | Re: Some notes about redesigning planner data structures |
| Previous Message | Richard Troy | 2007-01-11 22:01:53 | Re: [HACKERS] Checkpoint request failed on version 8.2.1. |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-01-11 23:10:20 | Re: [HACKERS] unusual performance for vac following 8.2 upgrade |
| Previous Message | Kim | 2007-01-11 21:52:23 | Re: unusual performance for vac following 8.2 upgrade |