| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jason Ralph <jralph(at)affinitysolutions(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: n_live_tup count increase after vacuum |
| Date: | 2019-09-19 14:14:33 |
| Message-ID: | 22870.1568902473@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Jason Ralph <jralph(at)affinitysolutions(dot)com> writes:
> I recently upgraded a neglected DB in our fleet that contains a huge table (1.4B) rows. I ran a vacuum against the huge table, as expected it took a long time, but it did finish.
> I think I understand most of what the output is saying... one confusing thing....
> The number of "live " tuples went up..(?)
If you're looking at the pg_stat counter, that's only an approximation.
It's probably a better approximation now than it was before.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2019-09-19 14:17:39 | Re: pgbackrest - question about restoring cluster to a new cluster on same server |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2019-09-19 14:09:57 | Re: PGPASSWORD in crypted form, for example BlowFish or SHA-256 |