| From: | Sami Imseih <samimseih(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Corey Huinker <corey(dot)huinker(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | VASUKI M <vasukianand0119(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Treat <rob(at)xzilla(dot)net>, Ilia Evdokimov <ilya(dot)evdokimov(at)tantorlabs(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Optional skipping of unchanged relations during ANALYZE? |
| Date: | 2026-01-29 22:24:02 |
| Message-ID: | CAA5RZ0vi7=pdB9xgu3U5pGkgXa_63+ZgE56OL-YdNTePn2oxtA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>> I am wondering if we should take the current SQL used by vacuumdb to
>> find missing stats and perform direct syscache lookups in C?
>
>
> So....about that. The exiting missing-stats-only queries test for a corresponding
> pg_statistic_ext_data row for any pg_statistic_ext row that meets the relation filters,
> but at this very moment we can restore all types of extended stats _except_ expressions.
> That functionality could make it into 19, but if it doesn't we're going to have to adjust
> vacuumdb to probe pg_statistic_ext.stxkeys for expression indexes and look for
> matching stxdexprs elements. I agree that those matches are better done with
> syscache lookups, but the SQL that we're treating as a spec might be a moving
> target in the near future.
Eventually we will want vacuumdb to use the "ANALYZE (MISSING_STATS)" command
directly, rather than the SQL, but until the restore functionality
works for extended stats
of expressions, we will need to keep those separated. Did I understand
that correctly?
--
Sami Imseih
Amazon Web Services (AWS)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Corey Huinker | 2026-01-29 22:48:50 | Re: Optional skipping of unchanged relations during ANALYZE? |
| Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2026-01-29 22:20:45 | Re: Non-committer reviews: is it helpful? |