| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, Fabrízio Mello <fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Add important info about ANALYZE after create Functional Index |
| Date: | 2020-10-28 19:05:39 |
| Message-ID: | 1442677.1603911939@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 03:46:10PM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
>> It would seem preferable to call the lack of auto-analyzing after these
>> operations a bug and back-patch a fix that injects an analyze side-effect
>> just before their completion. It doesn't have to be smart either,
>> analyzing things even if the created (or newly validated) index doesn't
>> have statistics of its own isn't a problem in my book.
> I agree the lack of stats may be quite annoying and cause issues, but my
> guess is the chances of backpatching such change are about 0.000001%. We
> have a usable 'workaround' for this - manual analyze.
This doesn't seem clearly different from any other situation where
auto-analyze doesn't react fast enough to suit you. I would not
call it a bug, at least not without a wholesale redefinition of
how auto-analyze is supposed to work. As a close analogy, we
don't make any effort to force an immediate auto-analyze after
CREATE STATISTICS.
I don't see anything in the CREATE STATISTICS man page pointing
that out, either. But there's probably room for "Notes" entries
about it in both places.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2020-10-28 19:06:01 | Re: list of extended statistics on psql |
| Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2020-10-28 19:01:21 | Re: [HACKERS] Custom compression methods |