From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
---|---|
To: | Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Remaining case where reltuples can become distorted across multiple VACUUM operations |
Date: | 2022-08-08 15:49:16 |
Message-ID: | CAH2-Wzk56LWsb7JCHpgqjD+DJU8+Zxc6T=CePGBtvHEODZzAuw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Aug 8, 2022 at 8:33 AM Matthias van de Meent
<boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> For example, if currently the measured 2% of the pages contains more
> than 100% of the previous count of tuples, or with your patch the last
> page contains more than 100% of the previous count of the tuples, that
> new count is ignored, which seems silly considering that the vacuum
> count is supposed to be authorative.
The 2% thing is conditioned on the new relpages value precisely
matching the existing relpages from pg_class -- which makes it very
targeted. I don't see why scanned_tuples greatly exceeding the
existing reltuples from pg_class is interesting (any more interesting
than the other way around).
We'll always accept scanned_tuples as authoritative when VACUUM
actually scans all pages, no matter what. Currently it isn't possible
for VACUUM to skip pages in a table that is 32 pages or less in size.
So even the new "single page" thing from the patch cannot matter
there.
--
Peter Geoghegan
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jonathan S. Katz | 2022-08-08 15:50:16 | 2022-08-11 release announcement draft |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2022-08-08 15:45:47 | Re: [PATCH] CF app: add "Returned: Needs more interest" |