| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Zeugswetter Andreas OSB sIT <Andreas(dot)Zeugswetter(at)s-itsolutions(dot)at>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: vacuumdb --freeze |
| Date: | 2009-02-19 17:49:51 |
| Message-ID: | 10312.1235065791@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> vacuum analyze doesn't unfreeze pg_class. It could create unfrozen
>> tuples in pg_statistic, perhaps, but we could easily fix that by
>> truncating pg_statistic afterwards (its not like there will be useful
>> data there...)
> I have added --analyze to the vacuumdb command and documented its
> purpose.
Surely that's backwards? What's the point of doing analyze work you'll
have to throw away?
>> The end goal is going to be to have all this work happen in a standalone
>> backend,
> Any idea how to do that?
I didn't say it was easy.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-02-19 18:20:49 | Re: Fixing Grittner's planner issues |
| Previous Message | decibel | 2009-02-19 17:49:29 | Knuth "nested parens" picture |