Re: autovacuum vacuum creates bad statistics for planner when it log index scans: 0

From: tim_wilson <tim(dot)wilson(at)telogis(dot)com>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: autovacuum vacuum creates bad statistics for planner when it log index scans: 0
Date: 2014-06-06 00:55:19
Message-ID: 1402016119875-5806283.post@n5.nabble.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Thanks for you response Tom:
but what does index_scans:0 mean? vs index scans: 1?

I have had a look at the c code but cannot see when it that would be the
case.

--
View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/autovacuum-vacuum-creates-bad-statistics-for-planner-when-it-log-index-scans-0-tp5804416p5806283.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - performance mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2014-06-06 02:02:01 Re: Re: autovacuum vacuum creates bad statistics for planner when it log index scans: 0
Previous Message Vincent Lasmarias 2014-06-05 23:57:11 Re: CPU load spikes when CentOS tries to reclaim 'cached' memory