From: | Robert Treat <rob(at)xzilla(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, "pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Clarify VACUUM FULL exclusion in total_vacuum_time docs |
Date: | 2025-06-06 15:13:25 |
Message-ID: | CABV9wwMs4g9nq-fKy=fFqU-rQUf6fiCqJg4_+MkqOnJE1n2TBA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs |
On Fri, Jun 6, 2025 at 9:57 AM David G. Johnston
<david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Friday, June 6, 2025, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Since last_vacuum and vacuum_count in pg_stat_all_tables explicitly mention
>> that they don't include VACUUM FULL ("not counting VACUUM FULL"), I think
>> we should add the same clarification to the description of total_vacuum_time.
>> This field also excludes VACUUM FULL, and without this note, users might
>> mistakenly think the time spent on VACUUM FULL is included. Thought?
>>
>> <structfield>total_vacuum_time</structfield> <type>double precision</type>
>> </para>
>> <para>
>> - Total time this table has been manually vacuumed, in milliseconds.
>> + Total time this table has been manually vacuumed, in milliseconds
>> + (not counting <command>VACUUM FULL</command>).
>> (This includes the time spent sleeping due to cost-based delays.)
>> </para></entry>
>> </row>
>
>
> Makes sense. Our naming this table rewrite vacuum full does confuse people into thinking it is related to vacuum.
>
+1 for this change, but I think we should also update
n_ins_since_vacuum as well, no?
Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Treat | 2025-06-06 18:11:17 | Re: Add missing references to database object statistics manipulation functions in documentation |
Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2025-06-06 13:57:11 | Re: Clarify VACUUM FULL exclusion in total_vacuum_time docs |