Re: Optional skipping of unchanged relations during ANALYZE?

From: Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se>
To: VASUKI M <vasukianand0119(at)gmail(dot)com>, 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: 2026-02-13 16:27:15
Message-ID: be509f90-74bd-4a81-83a7-d5afa0d17b38@proxel.se
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2/13/26 1:14 PM, VASUKI M wrote:
> As discussed earlier in the thread, I plan to start a new discussion and
> patch series for a separate ANALYZE (MODIFIED_STATS) option that would
> reuse autoanalyze-style thresholds. I believe keeping MISSING_STATS_ONLY
> and MODIFIED_STATS as separate, clearly defined options makes the
> semantics easier to reason about.

When would a user ever want MODIFIED_STATS without also analyzing tables
without any stats? I had more thought of calling it something like
SKIP_UNMODIFIED but maybe there is a case for MISSING_STATS_ONLY,
especially since the command line tool supports it.

Andreas

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Lukas Fittl 2026-02-13 16:39:42 Re: Reduce timing overhead of EXPLAIN ANALYZE using rdtsc?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2026-02-13 15:58:06 Re: AIX support