| From: | VASUKI M <vasukianand0119(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Sami Imseih <samimseih(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Corey Huinker <corey(dot)huinker(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: | 2026-01-30 04:59:03 |
| Message-ID: | CAE2r8H5kDpOTZv5sRGYe0BF2gN45fgCKOJ2GD-tpwsJKAxWsVg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi all,
Thanks a lot for the detailed and thoughtful feedback. I want to confirm my
understanding of the points raised and how I plan to align the work going
forward.
On the implementation details raised by Ilia:
I agree that the current flag definition and placement need correction. The
MISSING_STATS option must use a unique flag value, and the check should be
performed only after the standard relation validation, privilege checks,
and existing skip conditions in analyze_rel(). I will fix both and verify
the behavior with assertions enabled.
Regarding behavior and scope, I understand the concern that the current v3
implementation does not exactly match vacuumdb --missing-stats-only
semantics. My intent was not to claim behavioral equivalence, but to expose
a server-side ANALYZE option that identifies relations requiring statistics
collection. I agree that this distinction needs to be made clearer.
The suggestion to reuse existing ANALYZE internals, in particular
examine_attribute(), makes sense. Leveraging that logic to determine
whether analyzable attributes lack statistics should align the
implementation more closely with core ANALYZE behavior and avoid
re-defining missing-stats rules independently.[Thanks Sami for teaching me
this as i am an new contributor:) ]
On vacuumdb integration: I agree that this patch should focus only on
defining server-side ANALYZE semantics. As noted, vacuumdb is a client tool
that must handle multiple server versions, and the definition of “missing
stats” itself is evolving (especially for extended and expression
statistics). Adapting vacuumdb to use ANALYZE(MISSING_STATS_ONLY) can be
considered as follow-up work once the server-side behavior is finalized.
Finally, I agree that the option name should be MISSING_STATS_ONLY for
clarity and consistency with vacuumdb.
Thanks again for the guidance — it has been very helpful in understanding
the expected direction and design constraints. I will post an updated patch
addressing the above points.
*Vasuki MC-DAC,Chennai*
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2026-01-30 05:06:08 | Re: AIX support |
| Previous Message | vignesh C | 2026-01-30 04:49:55 | Re: [Proposal] Adding Log File Capability to pg_createsubscriber |