| From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com>, Sami Imseih <samimseih(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Treat <rob(at)xzilla(dot)net>, satyanarlapuram(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, tndrwang(at)gmail(dot)com |
| Subject: | Re: Add pg_stat_autovacuum_priority |
| Date: | 2026-04-09 00:57:23 |
| Message-ID: | adb5c_x34Gn94BXk@nathan |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Apr 08, 2026 at 05:59:36PM -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2026-04-08 16:23:45 -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>> What's interesting is that I cannot reproduce similar usage with views like
>> pg_stat_all_tables.
>
> Hm? That would be very surprising. Is it possible you used LIMIT 1 or such?
> The way the pg_stat_all_tables view works it only accesses stats data for
> returned rows (because it does all the stats lookups with individiual columns,
> which also makes it really slow, but avoids having to form datums for not
> returned columns).
*facepalm*
I was using count(*). If I do something like sum(n_dead_tup), I see much
more memory used by pg_stat_all_tables. Sorry for the noise.
--
nathan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2026-04-09 01:01:41 | Centralised architecture detection |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2026-04-09 00:20:00 | Re: pgstat vs aset |