Re: Proposal: GetOldestXminExtend for ignoring arbitrary vacuum flags

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: "Seki, Eiji" <seki(dot)eiji(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Proposal: GetOldestXminExtend for ignoring arbitrary vacuum flags
Date: 2017-02-15 09:25:37
Message-ID: CAB7nPqQHfF751QBwm_H9wFs1VZmJWR=yY4vtNpdSsiFu=YwLdw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 5:32 PM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> Please persuade us with measurements that allowing this impact on
> ANALYZE would really improve performance at least in your case, and
> also examine the effect of this on the accuracy and usefulness of the
> gathered statistics.

FWIW, there was last week a developer meeting in Tokyo, and Seki-san
has presented such measurements. So it is not like nothing exists in
this area.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ashutosh Bapat 2017-02-15 09:26:43 Re: Documentation improvements for partitioning
Previous Message Alexander Korotkov 2017-02-15 08:49:38 Re: Should we cacheline align PGXACT?