Re: vacuum analyze again...

Bruce Momjian writes:
> > Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> >
> > > No, we have no ability to randomly pick rows to use for
> > > estimating statistics. Should we have this ability?
> >
> > That would be really slick, especially given the fact that VACUUM
> > runs much faster than VACUUM ANALYZE for a lot of PG users. I
> > could change my daily maintenance scripts to do a VACUUM of
> > everything, followed by a VACUUM ANALYZE of the small tables,
> > followed by a VACUUM ANALYZE ESTIMATE (or whatever) of the large
> > tables.
> >
> > Even cooler would be the ability to set a table size threshold,
> > so that VACUUM ANALYZE would automatically choose the appropriate
> > method based on the table size.
>
> Added to TODO:
>
> * Allow ANALYZE to process a certain random precentage of
> rows

Does this reduced analysis need to be random? Why not allow the DBA
to specify what rows or blocks to do in some way.
--
Pete Forman -./\.- Disclaimer: This post is originated
WesternGeco -./\.- by myself and does not represent
pete(dot)forman(at)westerngeco(dot)com -./\.- opinion of Schlumberger, Baker
http://www.crosswinds.net/~petef -./\.- Hughes or their divisions.