From: | Markus Bertheau <twanger(at)bluetwanger(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Preliminary patch for on-the-fly relpages/reltuples |
Date: | 2004-12-06 10:14:41 |
Message-ID: | 1102328081.3382.1.camel@fc3 |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-patches |
В Пнд, 29/11/2004 в 19:14 -0500, Tom Lane пишет:
> + /*
> + * lazy_update_relstats - update pg_class statistics for a table or index
> + *
> + * We always want to set relpages to an accurate value. However, for lazy
> + * VACUUM it seems best to set reltuples to the average of the number of
> + * rows before vacuuming and the number after vacuuming, rather than just
> + * using the number after vacuuming. This will result in the best average
> + * performance in a steady-state situation where VACUUMs are performed
> + * regularly on a table of roughly constant size, assuming that the physical
> + * number of pages in the table stays about the same throughout. (Note that
> + * we do not apply the same logic to VACUUM FULL, because it repacks the table
> + * and thereby boosts the tuple density.)
> + */
> + static void
> + lazy_update_relstats(Relation rel, BlockNumber num_pages,
> + double num_tuples, double tuples_removed,
> + bool hasindex)
> + {
> + num_tuples = ceil(num_tuples + tuples_removed * 0.5);
Not understanding a thing about the PG source code, and judging from the
variable names, wouldn't you want ceil(num_tuples + (num_tuples -
tuples_removed) * 0.5) instead?
> + vac_update_relstats(RelationGetRelid(rel), num_pages, num_tuples,
> + hasindex);
> }
--
Markus Bertheau <twanger(at)bluetwanger(dot)de>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | laurie.burrow | 2004-12-06 13:25:09 | Reverse engineering problem on views |
Previous Message | Marko Kreen | 2004-12-05 23:54:14 | Re: patch contrib/pgcrypto for win32 (2) |